Posted on 02/01/2006 1:27:51 PM PST by GEC
New weapon could mean the end of collateral damage
The U.S. military has been developing a gunship that could literally obliterate enemy ground targets with a laser beam.
The military plans to test the Advanced Tactical Laser, a laser weapon mounted on a C-130H air transport that could destroy any weapon system without collateral damage.
The laser could have tremendous repercussions on the battlefield, particularly in urban warfare in such countries as Afghanistan and Iraq. "It's the kind of tool that could bring about victory within minutes," an official said.
The applications of ATL could change military dynamics on the battlefield. Officials envision the laser being able to destroy or damage targets in an urban area with virtually no collateral damage. The range of ATL was expected to be 10 miles.
The project has been headed by Boeing Missile Defense Systems in a project with the U.S. Air Force. Boeing has already taken delivery of the aircraft and plans to modify the platform for the ATL program.
Officials said a C-130H transport that belonged to the U.S. Air Force's 46th Test Wing was being modified to contain a high-energy chemical laser. The platform would also contain battle management and beam control subsystems.
Under the program, Boeing would test the aircraft in July 2006. The aircraft would have all subsystems on board except the high-energy laser. Officials said a low-power surrogate laser would be used instead of the kilowatt-class, high-energy laser.
At the same time, the high-energy laser would be completed in Albuquerque, N.M. Officials said the first ground tests of the laser would take place in the summer of 2006.
By 2007, Boeing plans to install the laser on the aircraft and operate the weapon during flight. The laser, designed to be fired through an existing 50-inch-diameter hole in the aircraft's belly, would be demonstrated for military missions.
Officials said ATL was being developed through the Pentagon's Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program. Should the tests in 2007 prove successful, the Pentagon was expected to approve full-scale development of the airborne tactical laser.
The ATL was deemed as complementary to the Airborne Laser program for the Missile Defense Agency. ABL was meant to mount a megawatt-class chemical laser on a Boeing 747-400 freighter aircraft.
I'm not Walter Cronkite or anything, but I'm pretty sure we already whipped them.
How long before the Russians get it and give it terrorists?
That's quite a breakthru - a weapon that eliminates all possibility of human error on the battlefield.
No, they have to settle for ill-tempered sea bass, just like everyone else.
This is cool too . . .
That model is mounted aboard a Boeing 747, currently in integration testing.
LOLOL - it leaves behind a seared-on message saying "testing...testing...123"
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".
They were pondering the immortal words of Socrates, who said... "I drank WHAT?"
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?
LR
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...
I think the better option for missile and artillery defense is the MetalStorm project. Kind of like a Phalanx on steroids.
But we can only use it over large well known tourist attractions like in Independence Day.
Set Phasers to Extra-Crispy.
For some reason, I'm thinking of the movie "Mars Attacks".
I was wondering if anyone else thought of Chris Knight.
"Put simply -- in deference to you, Kent -- it's like lazing a stick of dynamite."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.