View Full Version : Airborne Laser (ABL) ready for flight testing
SUBMAN1
10-31-06, 05:10 PM
Its about time they roll this damn thing out! :up: When I worked on this project way back when, they had a little problem with the gas released after firing the laser. Apparently it was so hot, it would melt the rear elevator off if they fired it! I guess they fixed that little annoyance.
-S
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article1938371.ece
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/images/abl_AC_unstow_NO_F16_375x300.jpg
Onkel Neal
10-31-06, 05:13 PM
Yeah, baby! :rock:
SUBMAN1
10-31-06, 05:21 PM
An Overview of the aircraft can be found here:
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/
-S
ASWnut101
10-31-06, 06:24 PM
Its been out and in final prototype phase for awile.......
SUBMAN1
10-31-06, 06:32 PM
Its been out and in final prototype phase for awile.......
Yeah, but its never been cleared for FLight test before!
-S
ASWnut101
10-31-06, 06:36 PM
So?
real men don't need "flight tests":p :cool:
SUBMAN1
10-31-06, 06:46 PM
So?
real men don't need "flight tests":p :cool:
Fine by me! But after we paid billion on Dev, I think I'll opt for a flight test! :p
-S
tycho102
11-01-06, 02:39 PM
Well, I couldn't read the article, but I remember reading about these things a decade or so ago.
They fire a couple blasts from a kilowatt laser to measure the atmostphere between the plane and the target. Air temperature, wind speed, particulate matter -- everything scatters the laser and reduces it's effective range. Then the main laser fires. I guess the thing ionizes some of the air around it, causing turbulance around the aircraft as it passes over the disturbed air. So the plane can only fire a pair of shots within something like 250ms, and then it has to wait something like 20 seconds before the platform is stable enough to shoot again.
It's a good idea for a mobile defense platform, but because there's a effective arc that the laser cannot target outside of, it's got severe limitations.
I think the ground based ones will be more effective, with the planes supplementing them.
Arkbird....very nice.... :up:
ASWnut101
11-01-06, 05:20 PM
I wonder if they can rig it to fire at people.....:hmm:
SUBMAN1
11-01-06, 05:38 PM
I wonder if they can rig it to fire at people.....:hmm:
Like - were did that guy go? He was just here? Whats that smell too? :)
-S
ASWnut101
11-01-06, 08:39 PM
yes, like that:yep: :yep: :yep:
snowsub
11-01-06, 10:45 PM
Wonder how heavy that sucker would be :hmm:
I'm assuming it must have a lot of electrical motors & generators to power it :ping:
bookworm_020
11-02-06, 12:22 AM
The plane would all be at risk as it would have to fly close to the launch site, if you know where the launch site is going to be!
Wim Libaers
11-02-06, 11:26 AM
Wonder how heavy that sucker would be :hmm:
I'm assuming it must have a lot of electrical motors & generators to power it :ping:
Probably not. It's a chemical laser for the main beam, so it shouldn't need excessive amounts of power. Does require lots of corrosive chemicals though.
SUBMAN1
11-02-06, 11:39 AM
The plane would all be at risk as it would have to fly close to the launch site, if you know where the launch site is going to be!
Apparently not. You can fly this thing pretty far into friendly territory and still have it make kills from 600 km away. That is some long range firepower! ALso, the IR is designed to look for a launch and auto target the missile.
Also...in theory...could you not place a prisim satellite in orbit, and line up a shot that would pass over the curviture of the Earth. If not a prisim then something else that would help deflect a laser.
SUBMAN1
11-02-06, 12:26 PM
Also...in theory...could you not place a prisim satellite in orbit, and line up a shot that would pass over the curviture of the Earth. If not a prisim then something else that would help deflect a laser.
The theory is that this thing will be effective against aircraft, low orbit satillites, and cruise missiles, so your theory could hold true if that were part of the system, but it isn't.
-S
It's certainly a vital component at a time like this, with more and more states obtaining advanced missile technology. Eventually, I would have thought though, that there will come a time when the technology will be deployed from a defensive role to an offensive role. Given enough power, this laser could surely severely damage armour and ground personnel, a cleaner, more precision equivilent of a nuclear strike.
A network of deflection satellites in orbit...perhaps...could mean that you could fire a stationary laser from the US and strike somewhere in China...coupling this with Spysats for precision, real-time strikes.
....ok...ok...I'll stop being so warlike... :oops:
SUBMAN1
11-02-06, 01:39 PM
It's certainly a vital component at a time like this, with more and more states obtaining advanced missile technology. Eventually, I would have thought though, that there will come a time when the technology will be deployed from a defensive role to an offensive role. Given enough power, this laser could surely severely damage armour and ground personnel, a cleaner, more precision equivilent of a nuclear strike.
A network of deflection satellites in orbit...perhaps...could mean that you could fire a stationary laser from the US and strike somewhere in China...coupling this with Spysats for precision, real-time strikes.
....ok...ok...I'll stop being so warlike... :oops:
You also remember that there is a second system to kill these missiles in the boost phase - there is a modified Ticonderoga sporting a modified SM block 2 that is designed to shoot these things down. Matter of fact, one of these ships is off the N. Korean coast right now.
We also have THAAD (A modified PAC-3 Patriot) in Alaska and Florida and it has been scoring successful hits on re-entry vehicles lately.
This tripple threat makes any state that attacks the US to not have 100% chance of hitting it, where in the past, it was a guarantted 100% chance they would nuke something had their missile worked. Now the thought of the US stopping the attack and retalliating at the same time makes a ballistic missile attack not a very desirable thing!!! This is what we want!
ASWnut101
11-02-06, 03:19 PM
But, if one somehow, in a one and a million chance gets through, you will be seeing this outside your window in ten minutes:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg/792px-Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg)
Now THATS doomsday.
SUBMAN1
11-02-06, 03:25 PM
But, if one somehow, in a one and a million chance gets through, you will be seeing this outside your window in ten minutes:
Now THATS doomsday.
No I won't since all of those didn't go off! :D Nukes need to explode above the ground to be most effective!
-S
ASWnut101
11-02-06, 03:29 PM
......:roll: They were duds.......but you get the point, right? Imagine if they were not.:smug:
SUBMAN1
11-02-06, 03:37 PM
......:roll: They were duds.......but you get the point, right? Imagine if they were not.:smug:
Yep - duds! THe fact of the matter is, you can't stop an arsenel like Russia's with the current systems, but N. Korea's could and should be shot down prior to impact with a high probability. No longer can a country like N. Korea use MAD as a bargaining chip in negotiations with the US. The US however can still make sure they are wiped off the map in retaliation, leaving it (the US) in a similar position prior to N. Korea's aquisition of nukes. This puts them back at square one in essence and it is a position that we want to be in and have been since the mid 1940's.
-S
ASWnut101
11-02-06, 04:55 PM
yep, as there is no need to shoot down russian salvos anymore. In fact, apparently ten or so years ago, we removed alot of russia off the "pre-planned" strike list. our systems are good for what you said: shooting down a crappy NK missile, not a russian mass fire. Just wanted to bring it up. I kinda like nukes, so........:|\\
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.