Missile defense gains another success
posted at 1:00 pm on December 4, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
Should Israel attack Iran, or should we just blow one of their missiles out of the air during the mullahcracy’s next test? We may be able to do that now, after the Air Force scored another impressive success with its airborne missile-defense platform. IBD notes that the progress gives the US more flexibility in its military plans:
The news that Iran has enough nuclear material to build a nuclear weapon in relatively short order and is well along on missiles to deliver its nukes has put a sense of urgency on the proposed missile defense system slated for Poland and the Czech Republic.
Fortunately, another answer to the threat posed by rogue regimes like Iran and North Korea has just passed a critical milestone.
That answer is the YAL-1A, a modified Boeing 747-400F equipped with the Airborne Laser (ABL) system, which includes a high-energy chemical laser designed to destroy ballistic missiles in their very vulnerable boost phase, missiles such as Iran’s Shahab series.
The ABL program places a megawatt-class, high-energy Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser (COIL) on a modified Boeing 747-400F aircraft to detect, track and destroy all classes of ballistic missiles. ABL also can pass information on launch sites, target tracks and predicted impact points to other layers of the global ballistic missile defense system.
This week, Boeing and the Missile Defense Agency announced another successful test — the first ground test of the entire weapon system integrated aboard the aircraft, including the firing of a high-energy laser through the ABL beam control/fire control system. Earlier tests had unit-tested other components of the system, particularly the ability to find, track and target missiles in flight.
After hitting the boost phase, a second shot would strike the missile itself, destroying it. The remnants would land on the nation that fired the missile, which might give them a few second thoughts about launching it in the first place. In fact, they’d have to pray that the second shot hits when the first shot succeeds.
Next January, the YAL-1A will attempt to shoot down an actual missile during the boost phase, which would make our abilities clear to the rest of the world — including the incoming administration. This gives us more options in dealing with rogue nations, and in deploying missile defense systems. As an option to installing fixed systems in nations where such facilities could create diplomatic tensions, a mobile airborne platform could fly continuous missions in international airspace around the countries posing threats.
The YAL-1A has another application as well. It can be used to protect the American coastline from submerged missile launches, a threat that had disappeared after the Cold War. If the Iranians can start building nuclear missiles, they may opt to start building submarines as launch platforms, following the lead of the US and the Soviet Union as a means of conducting a sneak attack. The precipitous drop in oil prices puts that kind of production out of reach of the Iranian economy, at least for now, but that won’t last forever.
General Henry Obering predicted three years ago that the Air Force missile-defense program would give the US its first “light saber”, playing off of the derogatory “Star Wars” label applied to the program by its critics. IBD says, “Let the (Air) Force be with us.” That force appears ready to take its place in America’s arsenal, and not a moment too soon.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Hasn’t Obama pledged to end all such research programs?
MarkTheGreat on December 4, 2008 at 1:05 PM
“America! F&@* Ya!”
thomashton on December 4, 2008 at 1:06 PM
So you’re saying we can beat nukes with a giant laser?
God Bless America.
BKennedy on December 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM
Most first generation nuclear devices are too heavy to put on a missile. Especially a missile small enough to fit on a sub, or put on any intercontinental missile that Iran is going to be able to build in the next few years.
Moving the bomb into the US in a shipping container or in a semi is still more likely.
MarkTheGreat on December 4, 2008 at 1:07 PM
Now I can’t wait for this week’s Aviation Week to be delivered.
Zorro on December 4, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Good on Boeing, no matter how much some want to berate the co.
Entelechy on December 4, 2008 at 1:10 PM
How long before we can strap these lasers onto mutated seabass?
Chuck Schick on December 4, 2008 at 1:10 PM
I’m sure it’s expensive. But, the only thing more expensive than the best weapons is…settling for the second best.
tre on December 4, 2008 at 1:11 PM
True…and I hesitate over whether I should prefix that with “fortunately” or “unfortunately.”
Count to 10 on December 4, 2008 at 1:11 PM
Can we put this system in orbit?
DL13 on December 4, 2008 at 1:12 PM
An Achilles Heel to this particular weapons system is that it would have to be in the air 24/7/365 to maintain protection.
Also, why would the Iranians need to develop a sub to carry out a sneak attack when they could simply load the missile onto a freighter and launch it from a cargo container rig? Much cheaper to do and more cost effective than trying to develop sub tech that could evade US SOSUS and SURTASS and existing sub patrols? The Iranians have had to buy Kilos for anything beyond littoral water operations, and the only demonstrated sub construction capabilities thus far are mini subs that are little more than one-way suicide torpedoes.
lawhawk on December 4, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Didn’t “Real Genuis” already invent this like 20 years ago?
Come on Air force. Use your Asgard weapons platforms.
redshirt on December 4, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Um, can I use this on my neighbor down the street?
Grantman on December 4, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Awesome! The Air Force frikkin’ RULES!
Tony737 on December 4, 2008 at 1:18 PM
How long does the boost phase of a missile last, and how much warning would you have? If you had one of these YAL-1As stationed in say, Isreal, Poland, Australia, and Japan you could probably cover just about any potential attack site.
BKennedy on December 4, 2008 at 1:19 PM
I feel so safe with good ole’ Joe co-leading our country…
Biden at the VP debate:
Y-not on December 4, 2008 at 1:20 PM
I’m not at all versed on how this process works, but doesn’t that require the plane to takeoff and be near the country in question while the missile is still over the country of origin?
How big of a time window is that? We’d have to know it was launched, and get it before it travels outside the country’s borders.
MadisonConservative on December 4, 2008 at 1:22 PM
What I’m most interested in is what the effect would be if the laser was aimed a little lower. Makes the AC130 look lame when you can bring a laser close support/ground attack platform. Iranian leadership buildings should be excellent test targets!
libertarianuberalles on December 4, 2008 at 1:25 PM
Operation Chrome Dome comes to mind.
Yakko77 on December 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Not being a rocket scientist, I have a question regarding the above.
Suppose it was a nuclear warhead being hit and fallen onto its own nation (or nearby one), it would not have been the same as an A-bomb, would it? At best it would have been ‘a dirty bomb’.
Am I wrong?
Sir Napsalot on December 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM
No, because Obambi vows not to “weaponize” space.
Puddleglum on December 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Freakin’ build a bunch of these now. Put them in flight around our country and rogue nations. Secure us, surround other potential threats, and boost our economy all at the same time (more employed people making them, etc…)
jwehman on December 4, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Why would we need a second strike? Hitting the ground will not cause the bomb to go off.
Blasting the warhead while it is still in the air would have the affect of scattering parts of it over a large area.
Coming down intact will keep it’s remains in a fairly localized area.
MarkTheGreat on December 4, 2008 at 1:27 PM
Hey, let’s fly it over Pakistan and zap the mullahs preaching in front of a foaming-at-the-mouth crowd of crazy jihadis!
Tony737 on December 4, 2008 at 1:27 PM
My guess is that we are planning on building more than one.
MarkTheGreat on December 4, 2008 at 1:28 PM
This program is da bomb, real deal fat city, coupled with the Aegis SM-3 sea borne interceptor and the GBI (land based) systems we have effectively issued a one-fingered salute to our potential strategic enemies.
dmann on December 4, 2008 at 1:29 PM
Airborne alert has been done before. You would need at least two or three other ABL aircraft, plus tanker support. It would likely be sent to a threat area only if there was a viable threat brewing.
There is also a deterrent aspect to this weapon, where it may never need to be used in combat. If a hostile country knows the ABL is orbiting nearby, they will be less likely to even launch.
ZenDraken on December 4, 2008 at 1:30 PM
Hate to say it, but when the Obama missile defense cuts begin, ABL is at the top of the list.
Of all of our current BMD programs, ABL is by far the most “unproven,” the most gee-whiz, and a vivid reminder of the initial Buck Rogers hoopla that unfortunately engulfed Reagan’s SDI (and ensured that the derisive Star Wars label stuck to this day).
We’ve been hitting bullets with bullets (no lasers) quite frequently lately (read about them here at my brand new missile defense blog).
Cuffy Meigs on December 4, 2008 at 1:30 PM
This makes no sense from an Iranian threat perspective. How will this airborne laser stop a ten ton bomb from detonating inside a cargo container in New York harbor?
Answer me that one.
keep the change on December 4, 2008 at 1:32 PM
Not just that…
.
With luck, Lightworker will follow his pattern of flip-flopping and get on board with this program by declaring that this test makes it a “proven” system.
Y-not on December 4, 2008 at 1:37 PM
One of their missiles? It will probably be only one missille, to be later photoshopped into six.
jgapinoy on December 4, 2008 at 1:42 PM
This sounds great, although it does have one weakness: when the Iranians launch a missile, how long does it take to get the modified 747 airborne? After all, it took over an hour to scramble Air Force fighter jets on 9/11/2001, and none of them got near the hijacked airliners before they crashed. If it took that long to scramble the laser plane, the missile might have already hit its target.
A high-powered laser has the advantage of traveling at the speed of light, meaning that the targeted missile can’t possibly outrun it, but lasers (like all other light) can be blocked by clouds or refracted (bent) by a thick atmosphere, which is probably why it is mounted on a high-flying jet, to get above most of the atmosphere. But the major challenge to this is getting the plane airborne before the missile hits its target.
Steve Z on December 4, 2008 at 1:45 PM
It would take at least 10 years for the Iranians to have a chance at becoming competent ballistic missile submariners.
blink on December 4, 2008 at 1:46 PM
All it takes is one nuke trucked or smuggled into this country and the world plunges off the end.
Firebird on December 4, 2008 at 1:46 PM
Along those lines let me add this:
I am an officer in a Special Forces support company. Shortly after the elections my commanders staff gathered and we questioned him about our future. Every single one of us had already been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan either as an NCO earlier in career or platoon leader.
He told us from what he’s been hearing from higher up, we’ll be okay but that’s because we’re in the SF community. The Army fully expects budget cuts and redeployment of troops out of hot spots. He specifically said of us, “It looks like Obama is goign to like getting things done with a small footprint on smaller money. This means you and your men. Not, full BCTs or Divisions. Get them ready and get them trained.”
By the end of the meeting we had been given WARNOs for at least 4 different missions in 4 different theatres between now and next December.
thomashton on December 4, 2008 at 1:48 PM
Yes.
CP on December 4, 2008 at 1:51 PM
As CP said, Both, Cap’n.
steveegg on December 4, 2008 at 1:53 PM
FYI the pentagon already paid for 7 of these, so the 24/7 idea isn’t too hard with a fleet of these. I’m sure they’ll buy more once proven.
Also, you cannot get a nuclear weapon to yield energy by shooting the warhead with a laser. It’s not triggered by photons, but by neutrons.
hanzblinx on December 4, 2008 at 1:54 PM
Can we call it the ABLaser?
I think that has a nice infomercial ring to it.
zmdavid on December 4, 2008 at 1:54 PM
I agree with the comments about the unlikelihood of the Iranians building nuclear subs. Even if they somehow managed to scrape together the wherewithal to build one and man it, they would be beginners in the arena of submarine warfare, and would be very unlikely to be able to defeat the tracking ability of our nuclear attack subs. It would be a stupider waste of resources than building a fighter to take on our Air Force.
The mullahs would be much more likely to use a proxy (i.e., terrorist group) to deliver a nuclear bomb via a low-tech mechanism.
SWLiP on December 4, 2008 at 1:56 PM
This is irrelevant. A nuclear powered attack submarine will not stop a cargo container or truck nuke either.
This system is designed to shoot down ballistic missiles, container nukes have to be addressed with different systems.
Meanwhile, for all your tactical directed energy needs we also have:
Advanced Tactical Laser
ZenDraken on December 4, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Hahahahahahaha!
CP on December 4, 2008 at 1:58 PM
Can we zero in on caves along the Afghan/Pakistan boarder?
PappaMac on December 4, 2008 at 2:01 PM
There was another use put forth as well: deniable assasination.
The jet spots a know terrorist from a long ways away (over the border of, say, Pakistan) while in friendly airspace. Then it just zaps him with this laser weapon. Not only will it kill the terr, it will vaporise him. No body to give a martydom parade to. They just…vanish. And we never violated “soverign” territory to do it.
pseudonominus on December 4, 2008 at 2:02 PM
Which is why the start flying these things long before the expected launch. Didn’t you read the article?
MarkTheGreat on December 4, 2008 at 2:05 PM
The laser wouldn’t set off the uranium, it would set off the explosives surrounding the uranium.
On the other hand, such an explosion would be very much asymmetrical and likely to do nothing more than blast the ball of uranium into little bits and spread it over a large area.
MarkTheGreat on December 4, 2008 at 2:08 PM
I don’t know what the size of the beam is for this weapon, but the ones I’ve heard about the diameter is only an inch or two across.
To vaporize the bad guy you would have to hit his entire body with the beam at the same time.
A beam of this power vaporizes the spot that it hits, then sends a powerfull thermal shock through the rest of the target. This thermal shock blasts the rest of the target to little bits.
Vaporize no.
Cover everyone within a few meters of the bad guy with a thin layer of bad guy ooze. Yes.
MarkTheGreat on December 4, 2008 at 2:12 PM
The aircraft with the death beam should be named the Millennium Falcon.
That would be so dope.
Oh, and I Stand With Israel.
madmonkphotog on December 4, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Regarding what the ABL specifically targets, keep in mind it’s lasing a fully-fueled, boosting ballistic missile. All it has to do is breach the skin — nearly anywhere — to cause the missile to lose structural integrity and rip itself apart.
A salvage fuse event may still occur with the warhead … but it happens over the hostile country, not CONUS.
Cuffy Meigs on December 4, 2008 at 2:15 PM
Gotta git me one o’ those!
Akzed on December 4, 2008 at 2:18 PM
I don’t think it would work that way. Let’s put Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in orbit instead.
MB4 on December 4, 2008 at 2:20 PM
BHO will cut the ABL,which will make us SOL.
MDWNJ on December 4, 2008 at 2:21 PM
I saw the prototype modified 747 at Paine Field in Everett, WA (home of the 747) a few years ago. Though I’d never seen the plane other than in photographs, I was aware of the program and recognized if immediately from the nose turret. I was just getting ready to take a couple of Chinese colleagues for a sight-seeing flight, and I pointed it out as it was taxiing by and explained what it was. They looked at it but didn’t say much other than ‘oh’. They seemed a bit uneasy though.
DarkCurrent on December 4, 2008 at 2:23 PM
This makes no sense from a criminal threat perspective. How will police in Chicago stop a bank robbery in Detroit?
Answer me that one.
Same concept.
MB4 on December 4, 2008 at 2:25 PM
Doesn’t that bring into focus of recent russian navy ships manuvering in the US backyards? It doesn’t HAVE TO be iranian subs.
Sir Napsalot on December 4, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Detectors installed at ports and along the coast can detect gammas rays given off by the nuclear weapons grade material from a significant distance.
Shielding can reduce but not hide the gamma rays at specific energies.
Right_of_Attila on December 4, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Great toys they are developing for the military.
Carry on boys.
ColdWarrior57 on December 4, 2008 at 2:28 PM
The ABL aircraft have to stay up in many areas all the time–this may be possible, but is probably difficult. Strategic Air Command kept a number of nuke armed B-52’s up 24/7 during the cold war–but they had targets a long way off. Line of sight problems probably make it tougher for the ABL planes. Still–a good job by the Air Force.
***
Some U.S.A. and Israeli ground based lasers have blown up short range rockets and artillery shells in flight–this would help a lot in areas near Lebanon and Gaza.
***
John Bibb
rocketman on December 4, 2008 at 2:30 PM
On the first day of Christmas the Air Force gave to me:
An Airborne Laser trashing tyranny
BKennedy on December 4, 2008 at 2:32 PM
As “Shaq, The Shot-Blocker“, swats down every single Israel-intended missile, the Iranian leader’s pants suddenly turn brown in back.
whitetop on December 4, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Apologies to Madeline Albright, but…
It’s great to be a super-power.
whitetop on December 4, 2008 at 2:37 PM
(The Eight years of an Obama Presidency)
By the first year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
A big tax increase on my salary.
By the second year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
Two liberal supreme court appointees,
And a big tax increase on my salary.
By the third year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
Three trips to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Two liberal supreme court appointees,
And a big tax increase on my salary.
By the fourth year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
Four Army divisions disbanded,
Three trips to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Two liberal supreme court appointees,
And a big tax increase on my salary.
By the fifth year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
Five Al Gore global warming edicts,
Four Army divisions disbanded,
Three trips to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Two liberal supreme court appointees,
And a big tax increase on my salary.
By the sixth year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
Six of my favorite blogs banned,
Five Al Gore global warming edicts,
Four Army divisions disbanded,
Three trips to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Two liberal supreme court appointees,
And a big tax increase on my salary.
By the seventh year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
Seven million more babies aborted,
Six of my favorite blogs banned,
Five Al Gore global warming edicts,
Four Army divisions disbanded,
Three trips to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Two liberal supreme court appointees,
And a big tax increase on my salary.
By the eighth year of his Presidency,
Obama had given to me
Eight American states ceded to Mexico,
Seven million more babies aborted,
Six of my favorite blogs banned,
Five Al Gore global warming edicts,
Four Army divisions disbanded,
Three trips to meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Two liberal supreme court appointees,
And a big tax increase on my salary.
Tav on December 4, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Now correct me if im wrong, but i believe i read somewhere awhile ago, about many civilian applications that were derived from the military testing of lasers since the 80’s. So really if the libs cut this, couldn’t we say they are hampering the use of lasers for medical , and buisness needs. And that they are actually cutting more jobs and research, by not supporting this.
MDWNJ on December 4, 2008 at 2:39 PM
For years I listened to those chemical lasers fire off at the TRW plant next to Camp Pendelton. I knew something was big and important, when on the days the Pendelton would say they had large “artillery” practice, TRW plant was locked down and super secret.
But the booms came from the plant and not always the interior of Camp Pendelton.
Awesome to now see what they were working on…
right2bright on December 4, 2008 at 2:42 PM
And as far as HE knows we will not weaponize space – As mentioned earlier, “Plausible deniability”
Guest1.1 on December 4, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Shocking to believe but the “reality based community” never thought this could work.
rob verdi on December 4, 2008 at 2:58 PM
A bomb in its case, surrounded by lead, on a ship, will not be detectable by anyone. Nor can a bomb be detected that is in a cargo hold of an Iran Air 747 on final approach to JFK airport. It’s game over for New York City in either case. This laser system is only good for ICBMs, the kind of threat posed by Russia and China. For Iran, and their one bomb scenario, it does nothing to alleviate that threat.
keep the change on December 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM
That is true only if you think of our continental borders as the edge of our sphere of influence. But it isn’t. We also need to be able to provide protection for Europe and parts of Asia (e.g. Japan, S. Korea). This will provide protection from the missiles that Iran can build that will threaten our allies in Europe particularly.
As for how to know when put these birds in the air (and where), you all do realize that one of our enemies going into readiness to launch can often be detected by satellite, communication intercepts, and human intelligence? We often (not always, of course) can get early warnings, at which point we can increase our readiness for trouble. This particular system is just one more piece in a mosaic of tools designed to provide multiple layers of defense.
As for harbors and such there are some ways to detect nuclear material from a distance. It isn’t perfect, but I know for a fact that detectors for that kind of attack were worked on at least 25 years ago at places like Los Alamos.
And, of course, a solid strategy of offense to clean out the nests of fanatics and their supporters likely to commit such an attack is always appropriate.
iconoclast on December 4, 2008 at 3:06 PM
By the eighth year of his Presidency,
Excellent.
More material…
Fairness Doctrine (Nine radio personalities imprisoned?)
Amnesty (Ten million new illegal alie….ooops, citizens?)
Language (Eleven languages every document must be available in?)
Socialized medicine (Twelve members on the insurance board?)
Geministorm on December 4, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Let’s look at this first sentence.
Iran will arm terrorists with nuclear weapons, not missiles.
astonerii on December 4, 2008 at 3:14 PM
I don’t think that’s too big of an issue when it comes to defense. After all – didn’t we keep B-52’s in the air 24/7 loitering just outside of the USSR during the Cold War for rapid response to any actions they took?
Darbraun on December 4, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Unfortunately, that won’t matter once Obummer cuts off the entire fracking hand that finger is attached to, which he will.
Dark-Star on December 4, 2008 at 3:49 PM
I need oxygen.
Tomorrow’s Tehran Forecast: Scattered shiites, partial sunnis!
Black Adam on December 4, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Thank you, Ronald Reagan for “Star Wars” !
petefrt on December 4, 2008 at 3:58 PM
You know, all I ask for is sharks with frikkin laser beams attached to their heads…what do I pay you people for?
MechEng5by5 on December 4, 2008 at 4:12 PM
are they ill-tempered?
Black Adam on December 4, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Needs better formatting:
On the eight year of Obama, here’s the state of my country:
Eight states seceding
Seven million murders
Six censored sites
FIVE DIRTY BOMBS
Four unfunded mandates
Three dictator suckups
Two Marxist judges
And
The most massive tax hike of the century
BKennedy on December 4, 2008 at 4:28 PM
I’ve been saying for years that keeping Iran and other rogue nations away from nuclear weapons is a complete folly. Of course they’ll get the nukes – one day kids will be able to build them in their garage. This is the nature of technology folks.
The question is … what’s the policy after they have them? How do we ensure they don’t use them?
And for that … I’ve always said MISSILE DEFENSE was our best option … and combine that with a YAD deterrence policy.
What’s YAD? Well … in the old days of U.S. vs Soviet Union … there was a nuclear deterrence policy called MAD … “Mutual Assured Destruction”.
“YAD” is a slightly different twist on that notion. It stands for “YOUR ASSURED DESTRUCTION”.
Means “Hey Iran … see ya got nukes. Congratulations. Oh by the way – you shoot one – and we shoot it down. Then … we pave your entire country with nukes … Got it?”
HondaV65 on December 4, 2008 at 4:34 PM
I’m all for missile defense, but ABL is simply not the best weapon we have in our arsenal. Sure, it’s a decent concept worth investigating, and I wish it would work, but there are way, way too many operational difficulties that stand in the way of this ever being deployed (and too many difficulties in using the weapon assuming it is deployed). I mean, how do we plan to get a big ‘ol lumbering, defenseless 747 into range to shoot down a missile? We have better options for boost phase missile defense than ABL. I wouldn’t mind being proven wrong about it, but I doubt it will happen.
otis685 on December 4, 2008 at 5:15 PM
Cuffy, normally I don’t like link adverts to one’s personal blog in posts here, but you are the exception: I have always enjoyed reading your writings because of the perspective you offer. BTW I used to work for Boeing on the RAH-66 project some years ago, so I know the climate (and yes, RAH-66 was so screwed by the Army that it deserved to be cancelled). Good to see you around.
Yes.
We.
Can!!!
IIRC, the power on the big mama COIL is 6MW, which was statistically the same power as mentioned in everyone’s favorite movie Real Genius. Difference here (for the geek crowd) was that RG’s plot involved freezing the fuel, whereas in reality, fuel is carried in liquid form.
But as to comments about plausible deniability for assassination, the modified AC-130 with a smaller COIL or solid-state laser is your platform of choice: long loiter/dwell times over target at 20,000+ft…and if I recall correctly here, the main beam itself is in the infrared band, so there is no visible laser beam to give itself away.
If I were in SOCOM (yes, wish like hell I had gone that route, in PsyOps), I’d name the first operational version of that particular aircraft “Allah”.
Combine that laser with the USN’s little directed sound toy (the one that can transmit a sound beam over tens of miles so tightly that if it’s beamed to you, the person standing next to you cannot hear it), and you have pure, unmitigated, PsyOps f*ck with their heads forever fun…
/don’t smoke, but suddenly need a ciggy for some reason
Wanderlust on December 4, 2008 at 5:25 PM
What would it be? Russian subs? Iranian surface ships? What’s your point?
blink on December 4, 2008 at 6:05 PM
Barack says NO.
AmericanDad on December 4, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Carry on, indeed.
Entelechy on December 4, 2008 at 6:47 PM
Could it be used to commit mystery mayhem say on Iran’s refining ability?
Speakup on December 4, 2008 at 7:05 PM
And a militarized civilian force door to door to confiscate firearms.
Speakup on December 4, 2008 at 7:08 PM
But not drugs, or illegal aliens, or electric cars, or liberal voters.
Speakup on December 4, 2008 at 7:12 PM
I think these tests are interesting but, as with so many of these programs, the counter is often much cheaper and easier to produce.
Iran wants a nuclear weapon because of its experience of being invaded during the Iran-Iraq war… not to perform some sort of sneak attack on the US or Israel. They know very well that any nuclear attack made by Iran would result in destruction of their nation. Iran is not ruled by a single crazed dictator in control of such weapons or their deployment. North Korea is more problematic, however.
There are more interesting weapons being used in Iraq right now which might be easier to use than an energy beam mounted on a 747.
lexhamfox on December 4, 2008 at 7:34 PM
How do you know why Iran wants nuclear weapons? Are you sure everyone in Iran wants nuclear weapons for the same purpose? Do you agree that Iran is developing nuclear weapons?
What weapons are being used in Iraq to counter long range ballistic missiles?
blink on December 4, 2008 at 9:19 PM
There is a version of the AC-130 testing a solid state laser (as opposed to the chemical laser in this YAL-1A) for “close air support” missions.
Zorro on December 4, 2008 at 9:34 PM
With an infrared beam invisible to the naked eye, I’d like to suggest this weapons system be named either “Allah” or “The Hand of God”.
Terrorist leader leaves hideout…then…ZZZZT! Gone.
And we can simply say, “what Allah giveth, ‘Allah’ taketh away…”
:)
Wanderlust on December 4, 2008 at 9:55 PM
The big question is: how fast is it. It takes a lot of delivered energy to take out a missile. Even at MW power levels this can take several seconds. If several missiles are launched simultaneously or in close succession the laser either can’t get them all before they pass boost stage, or you need several systems in the air at once, all in range, and coordinated so as not to target the same missile.
Still, it’s a good start. I’m guessing adaptive mirrors to overcome the dispersion and diffraction, and probably also to focus what is likely a donut mode from a leaky cavity onto the missile.
Gaunilon on December 4, 2008 at 10:03 PM
It sounds like a we have new weapon in our arsenal, which is great. We do need a defense against missiles…….however, some of those that hate this country will find other means of conducting unconventional warfare. It is only a matter of time before some nutcase will set off a suitcase nuclear weapon somewhere in this world.
SC.Charlie on December 4, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Reminds me of the movie Real Genius.
fossten on December 4, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Agree you are onto something here. Heck, we wouldn’t even have to *officially* name it ‘Allah’. It could have the same effect if it merely earns the *nickname* ‘Allah’. And, being what it is, it stands a darn good chance of that.
That way, after enough troops in theater refer to it as ‘Allah’ in front of their local colleagues, the nickname and its reputation would get around soon enough. Suits me just fine!
P.S. I’d say the YAL-1A is ‘Big Allah’, and the AC-130 is ‘Little Allah’, no?
RD on December 5, 2008 at 2:19 AM
Damned Americans. Bunch of evil geniuses.
Yeah, we are.
Suck it, bad guys.
SKYFOX on December 5, 2008 at 4:36 AM
You are vastly over estimating the power of any device Iran is going to be able to build in the next coupld of decades.
A bomb on the ship would take out the harbor. Not much more. A bomb on a plane would take out JFK, not much more.
MarkTheGreat on December 5, 2008 at 8:30 AM
They are called fighters. That’s what the militry normally uses to protect bombers.
As to how close do the 747’s have to be to the launch site. If the radar can spot the missile, the 747 can shot it down. So the horizon is pretty much your only limitation. As the missile gets higher, the distance from which it can be seen grows rapidly.
MarkTheGreat on December 5, 2008 at 8:35 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »