Army's High-Speed Laser Hits Shell

AP ^ | 11/09/2002 | Unknown

[Hellmouth]

What about counter-measures to the lasers, like
putting a mirrored finish on the shells, rockets, and missiles?

[Wissa]

I'll bet China wishes that Clinton was still President.

[Swiss]

That is what is impressing me as well, to distory an artillery shell in flight would mean either cooking off the explosive inside (by heating the shell) or by setting off the more sensitive fuse of the shell.

From what I have read of fires on the USS Lexington during WWII and other fires involving shells it took a lot of heat to cook off a shell. Very impressive stunt to do this with a Lasor in flight to a spinning shell.

[ChadGore]

Thanks . . that's more of an advancement in reactive armor, but COOL!.

[templar]

What about counter-measures to the lasers, like putting a mirrored finish on the shells, rockets, and missiles?

All expensive. Saddam and Jihad types won't be able to do it.

[templar]

WWII and other fires involving shells it took a lot of heat to cook off a shell.

TNT is melted and cast like lead. I'm not sure what the melting point would be, but is seems more likely that the laser sets off the fuse rather than the charge.

[appeal2]

If Custer had one of these, he would have won.

[Hellmouth]

What about counter-measures to the lasers, like putting a mirrored finish on the shells, rockets, and missiles?

All expensive. Saddam and Jihad types won't be able to do it.

What about the Russian and Chinese types? Won't that make the lasers obsolete and a big waste of money, if their scientists come up with an effective way of coating their weaponry?

[templar]

What about the Russian and Chinese types?

I doubt that we are going to be engaging in minor scuffles with the Russians or Chinese. Big wars are probably going to involve everything available on all sides. I think the lasers might be best suited to defending army bases and cities from small scale attack. Ships too. Rockets, mortars and light artillery slowly eat away at morale and manpower in lower level engagements. IMO, These type of engagements will probably be from technologicaly inferior forces, like Viet Nam was. Or Afganistan, maybe.

[nhoward14]

Will we be deploying this LAY-ZUR on frickin' shark heads?

Sincerely, Dr. Evil

[wcbtinman]

That photo made me think of the movie "Spies Like Us".

[Marathon]

I agree that this weapon would be most useful in small-scale engagements. It's been developed in collaboration with the Israeli army (this is the same system that has shot down 25 Katyusha rockets, including salvo launches, in tests). Just the sort of thing needed to prevent Hezbollah from an occasional terror strike over from Lebanon.

I read in another article (I work for TRW, and read a daily news digest pertaining to our company) that the Joint Strike Fighter is "expected" to have a laser weapon as part of its arsenal. Apparently the most likely form for it to take will be as a standalone unit that can be attached in place of those external fuel tanks. Unfortunately I don't recall more details.

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[eno_]

"Army's High-Speed Laser Hits Shell" ...yeah, I wanna see the low-speed laser.

[Woodman]

Got to here Boeing Airborn Laser. I think we may already have it.

And I'm sure it could hit a slow moving target much easier than a rocket.

[Woodman]

I think it is too big for the JSF but have a look at my post #55.

[Fiddlstix]

Bump

[MrB]

the 21st century isn't official until I have a flying car

Actually, this does exist.
SkyCar

[MrB]

I gave them the benefit of the doubt, but I was wrong.
My interpretation of "high speed laser" was the repeat fire time. No reference was made to this functionality.
Obviously these dimwits were referring to the beam speed. The first letter of the "LASER" acronym means "light", so it is by definition at light speed... duh.

[Charles Martel]

That big red "eye" looks familiar...

Seriously... this stuff *is* like something out of Jonny Quest.