PDA

View Full Version : Missile Shield Microwave/ Lasers



glow
10 Apr 06,, 23:43
With the multibillion dollar waste of money the US government is paying out to make some pretty lucky guys rich, I mean come on it's been proven it doesn't work and they are still working on it. It pays to have connections in washington. I don't think it will ever really do the job. Nor has it so far really in any tests. But I do see the US as being able to shine with Microwave/ laser technology. I see this being an awesome defense. Do any of you have any idea what kind of technology like this is currently being developed? The most I have heard about in this reguard was out of Israel and it was pretty good at knocking down some rockets but nothing amazing and the Unit was pretty big.

Jay
11 Apr 06,, 00:52
Dude,
Yuve already passed judgements even before knowing whats going on with USAF ABL program. and Israel is not even close to what USAF have acheived on this regard. The ABL program is in advanced integration testing as of Dec 2005 after succesful ground tests.

Use your friendly resource - google.com for more info.

RustyBattleship
11 Apr 06,, 03:44
It was back in the late 70s or early 80s when the Navy tested a new anti-missile weapon off of San Diego and it worked beautifully.

I'm not a sparktrician so I don't know what kinds of waves or frequencies were involved (they were somewhat classified anyway - only an article in the newspaper was allowed to say it worked). Basically, as the missile was incoming an electronic beam was projected on it that degaused the electrical circuitry, relays and switches in the bird's guidance and propulsion control system. The missile just shut off and fell into the ocean like a dead duck.

Naturally, since this beam also put some circuitry out of "phase" we called it ----- The Phaser. And I'm NOT making this up either. But why we haven't installed it on ships in lieu of the CIWS and Sea Sparrows was not within my "Need to know" parameters.

Maybe it required too much power. Maybe it took too long to find the right frequencies to "Phase out" or the right circuitry to degaus. I don't know but I sure as hell would like to have seen that mounted on the Battleships.

Wouldn't it be funny if on the first ship it is installed on that the Captain's name was Kirk and his weapons officer was Scott? "Kirk to Scott. Beam that bird into Davey Jones' locker."

glow
11 Apr 06,, 19:55
Dude,
Yuve already passed judgements even before knowing whats going on with USAF ABL program. and Israel is not even close to what USAF have acheived on this regard. The ABL program is in advanced integration testing as of Dec 2005 after succesful ground tests.

Use your friendly resource - google.com for more info.
Dude
Look one thread down. Link (http://worldaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?t=2033) Have you read the about the tests over the past 4 years? BTW what I'm talking about with Israel hasn't been tested for balistic missles. But you got to start somewhere. Beats just tossing a bunch of missles with 20% of hitting something and trying to get everyone to believe it was money well spent.

Jay
11 Apr 06,, 20:03
You are talking about 2 different things. I was specifically talking about Laser-USAF ABL and no other nation has acheived what US has acheived in that area.

highsea
11 Apr 06,, 20:32
With the multibillion dollar waste of money the US government is paying out to make some pretty lucky guys rich, I mean come on it's been proven it doesn't work and they are still working on it.You're not an American, are you...

It pays to have connections in washington. I don't think it will ever really do the job. Nor has it so far really in any tests. Only 4 out of 5 successful, last I heard.

But I do see the US as being able to shine with Microwave/ laser technology. I see this being an awesome defense. Do any of you have any idea what kind of technology like this is currently being developed?Yep.

The most I have heard about in this reguard was out of Israel and it was pretty good at knocking down some rockets but nothing amazing and the Unit was pretty big.That was the THEL. We pulled the plug on that last year.

gunnut
11 Apr 06,, 23:00
So if it doesn't work we give up?

glow
16 Apr 06,, 05:04
So if it doesn't work we give up?
You buy a perfected product. Not keep paying for something that doesn't work and trying to get other nations to buy it too. If you buy a car and it breaks down every 5 miles wouldn't you want to put your money into something that will actually work? This seems more like some big cash deals. Lot of people making some money when it should be going to other more reliable options than missles that hit 20% of their targets

dalem
16 Apr 06,, 05:52
With the multibillion dollar waste of money the US government is paying out to make some pretty lucky guys rich

Oh, go choke on a turd you little moron.

-dale

glow
16 Apr 06,, 23:49
Oh, go choke on a turd you little moron.

-dale

Prove to me I'm wrong. Because of course this sort of thing doesn't happen all the time. Just like politicans never get paid off. Or do you still believe politicians are honest?

Confed999
17 Apr 06,, 01:33
Prove to me I'm wrong.
Prove you're right. You got nothing so far...

dalem
17 Apr 06,, 07:07
Prove to me I'm wrong. Because of course this sort of thing doesn't happen all the time. Just like politicans never get paid off. Or do you still believe politicians are honest?

Glow chokes on turds.

Prove to me I'm wrong.

-dale

glow
17 Apr 06,, 16:05
link (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0513-02.htm)
Link 2 (http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7018)

Well as many reports from scientists saying this won't I dunno.. After all it's been missing targets for what 4 years now?

"Overall, the Pentagon estimates it will need $53 billion in the next five years to develop, field and upgrade a multilayered shield also involving systems based at sea, aboard modified Boeing 747 aircraft and in space."

Gee Boeing is making a pretty penny.
*Hey government we'll make a missle shield that might work!
+Okay! here's 80 billion for something that might not work.
*Gee thanks! BTW we'll need $53billion more to upgrade our shield that hasn't proven to fully work. And Sweet you can trust your safety to a modified 747 wooo!

Money well spent. I love how they are calling it upgrade. The thing isn't even in finished working order.

I think the guys at Boeing know if they get a bunch of missles sent they're ****ed anyways so whats the difference just rake in the cash for something that gives politicians and people a warm fuzzy feeling inside. What is Boeing going to say after there was a missile strike it didn't do the job? Well whoever survives I'm sure they could say it worked great they just didn't have enough funding to create a bigger shield. :rolleyes:

Confed999
17 Apr 06,, 16:51
One of your links cites a 62.5% success in testing.

highsea
17 Apr 06,, 19:07
And the second link just cites the abort from over a year ago. That test was rescheduled and was successful after the telemetry problem was fixed. (I happen to know the pilot of the chase plane from that test).

The prob was not in the interceptor, but in the test software. It was decided (correctly) to abort the test, since had they carried it out, most of the data would not have been collected, and the excersize would have been wasted.

2DREZQ
23 Apr 06,, 15:04
If you buy a car and it breaks down every 5 miles wouldn't you want to put your money into something that will actually work?


If nobody else on earth had any car at all, I might be talked into buy that one.

Guitarguy
27 Apr 06,, 08:42
The new solid state laser arrays show promise. At least they don't require large amounts of lethal chemicals.

gunnut
27 Apr 06,, 19:51
You buy a perfected product.

How do you perfect it? Who perfects it? How many times did Thomas Edison try before he came up with a working light bulb? Do you know what WD40 is? The 40 stands for the number of tries before they found a successful water displacement agent. Forty!

Go invent something big. You will be the lucky rich man if you can constantly come up with new inventions with only 1 try each.

gunnut
27 Apr 06,, 19:55
The new solid state laser arrays show promise. At least they don't require large amounts of lethal chemicals.

That's one plus. But we need to overcome atmospheric distortions. How about the power requirement? Our power grid is stained as it is. We need more power plants, preferably nuclear if we want to deploy a laser system.

Confed999
28 Apr 06,, 02:01
How do you perfect it? Who perfects it? How many times did Thomas Edison try before he came up with a working light bulb? Do you know what WD40 is? The 40 stands for the number of tries before they found a successful water displacement agent. Forty!
And neither of those are 100% perfect!

The Chap
01 Jun 07,, 23:20
I refer everyone to the ISBN bloody books that go back several ****ing years.