It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

USAF Begins SHIELD Laser Testing This Summer

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:29 PM
link   

The U.S. Air Force will this summer begin testing a laser that will be mounted on an F-15 warplane, an official said Monday.

The Pentagon last year awarded a $26 million contract to Lockheed Martin for a laser program called SHiELD (Self-protect High Energy Laser Demonstrator).

The idea is to put a laser system on aircraft with an output of about 50 kw to test their ability to zap drones or cruise missiles.

“We have got tests starting this summer and the flight tests next summer,” Jeff Stanley, deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for science, technology and engineering, told reporters.

“There are still some technical challenges that we have to overcome, mainly size, weight, power.”


www.defencetalk.com...

However, there may be some technical issues with stabilizing the beam during flight on smaller, tactical platforms:


The US Air Force (USAF) continues to struggle with stabilising lasers on its airborne platforms, according to a key service official.

Tony Hostutler, technical advisor at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) for laser technologies, told reporters on 19 March at the Pentagon that the aero-optics effects of air moving over the turret of airborne laser weapons has traditionally been a challenge. Hostutler said the USAF is working to further mitigate this jitter as the service matures directed energy, or laser, weapons to make them smaller and better.


www.janes.com...


It sounds as though the lasers may be smaller, but might not be small enough. Yet the power issue is raised, yet we know DARPA successfully tested the HELLADS laser. Perhaps this is due to how to run multiple tens of kilowatts of electricity through to the pod? The beam stabilization is a bit of an odd duck claim based on past tests, but...perhaps it has to do with the pod they are planning on sticking this one in? The size issue is almost assuredly due to cooling and the problem here is the form factor: an attached pod that must be self contained...save power.

The beam, fwiw, is being touted as 50 kw. That's what the USAF is willing to own up to. It's useful for self defense, but not for offensive operations. 100 kilowatts has been considered the point when a laser was called military grade, but that was for longer range operations. Much longer range operations.




posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

I knew it was gonna be a damn acronym.

I want a shield laser, though I don't know what good I would get out of it, but I still want it.



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Pew pew!!

What color are they?

They have them now to take out drones and vehicles.

Swift boats too, from ships.

Burn a hole in the engine, tail or hull.

The power is the key.




posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy


What color are they?


Mid IR, most likely.


Burn a hole in the engine, tail or hull.


The SHiELD laser is at least 5 times more powerful than those.



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Very cool. How does weather, like rain etc...effect performance? Any insight there? Are counter measures using refraction even viable? Totally ignorant on the topic, off to read your links.



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: anzha

I knew it was gonna be a damn acronym.

I want a shield laser, though I don't know what good I would get out of it, but I still want it.




An array of lasers encompassing an area that fries anything in front or around a vehicle would be a good thing.




posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: burgerbuddy


What color are they?


Mid IR, most likely.


Burn a hole in the engine, tail or hull.


The SHiELD laser is at least 5 times more powerful than those.



Good!


Is it hyper sonic?

lol.




posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: anzha

Very cool. How does weather, like rain etc...effect performance? Any insight there? Are counter measures using refraction even viable? Totally ignorant on the topic, off to read your links.



Would have to have total reflection for defence.

Any flaws would not work.




posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: anzha

I knew it was gonna be a damn acronym.

I want a shield laser, though I don't know what good I would get out of it, but I still want it.




An array of lasers encompassing an area that fries anything in front or around a vehicle would be a good thing.


Unless your in reverse!

edit on 19-3-2018 by Vector99 because: oh, you also said around it. doh!



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

Weather affects performance, of course. There are frequencies that pass through water better than average: blue-green lasers, frex. However, water will still absorb light even at the so-called right frequencies.

As noted, the shady looking (jking!) burgerbuddy noted, you need perfect reflection at the exact right frequency for the laser to be mitigated. The problem is getting the reflection right and keeping your mirrored surface perfect. Imperfections are the way to getting fried. Dust alone appears to be good enough to ruin a reflector. Good luck keeping that off your equipment on a battlefield!

Oh and burgerbuddy, c >>> Mach 5.



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: anzha

I knew it was gonna be a damn acronym.

I want a shield laser, though I don't know what good I would get out of it, but I still want it.




An array of lasers encompassing an area that fries anything in front or around a vehicle would be a good thing.


Unless your in reverse!



Hate when that happens.

"I'm givin her all I got!"

Or something like that.


edit on 3 19 2018 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: BlueJacket

Weather affects performance, of course. There are frequencies that pass through water better than average: blue-green lasers, frex. However, water will still absorb light even at the so-called right frequencies.

As noted, the shady looking (jking!) burgerbuddy noted, you need perfect reflection at the exact right frequency for the laser to be mitigated. The problem is getting the reflection right and keeping your mirrored surface perfect. Imperfections are the way to getting fried. Dust alone appears to be good enough to ruin a reflector. Good luck keeping that off your equipment on a battlefield!

Oh and burgerbuddy, c >>> Mach 5.







Well the dust would burn off but flaws in the hull underneath would not be good.

Is that why a lot of these ufo's are Silver?

Space war?

Liquid mercury?

Weight problem or with the right anti grav drive no prob?

But how to keep it in place?

Need force fields!

or?








posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

The dust provides for heat build up in particular spots. That warps and damages the underlying material. That makes it less perfect. And then....boom. big boom. They tested a spinning mirrored surface with MIRACL, the mid infrared advanced chemical laser. Sliced right through it.

As for the rest, the closest thing to an anti grav drive I've heard of would be dark energy and the Alcubierre drive. One's unexplained as yet (but seems to have anti gravity as part of it) and the other is theoretical.



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

The alcubierre drive makes sense once we figure out how to condense space in front of the vehicle, shield ourselves from the transfer, and expand it on the back side of the vehicle.

It is actually the only FTL engine I've ever seen that makes sense, and we will find that tech eventually, well so long as we don't kill ourselves off in a world war that is!



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

The Alcubierre drive requires negative matter: not antimatter, but negative matter. Negative matter and negative energy are theoretical at this point.



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: burgerbuddy

The dust provides for heat build up in particular spots. That warps and damages the underlying material. That makes it less perfect. And then....boom. big boom. They tested a spinning mirrored surface with MIRACL, the mid infrared advanced chemical laser. Sliced right through it.

As for the rest, the closest thing to an anti grav drive I've heard of would be dark energy and the Alcubierre drive. One's unexplained as yet (but seems to have anti gravity as part of it) and the other is theoretical.



Yes like I said, dust is no problem if the hull is perfect.




As a GP hull is transparent, most humans paint some or all of the hull to provide some privacy and to prevent problems associated with FTL travel through hyperspace and exposure to the "blind spot". To provide further protection, the hulls are normally lined with 'flare shielding', which instantly becomes reflective to any of the transmitted visible light wavelengths should the intensity rise above a certain threshold. Furthermore, since the Puppeteers are careful to an extreme degree to avoid any risk at all, they don't trust even these hulls completely. They have therefore installed in at least two (and possibly all) of their ships a Slaver Stasis field, which stops time inside the hull instantly should anything bad happen, and keeps it stopped until the bad thing goes away. In the absence of time, nothing can possibly affect the contents of the Stasis field until it turns itself off. Indeed, Louis Wu speculates that a ship with its Stasis field on would be able to handily survive a second big bang (though several stories cast doubt on this).


en.wikipedia.org...

Yeah, this is where I'm coming from, not really up on real tech.

But the thing is, "I thought it, Therefore It can happen"

Like "I think therefore I am"


Who knows where we actually are on the tech scale. We might be capable of 1 but for some reason it's being held back.

Or we are still dummies.





edit on 3 19 2018 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Two Niven references in a night. Something is afoot.



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: burgerbuddy



Two Niven references in a night. Something is afoot.


Haha! Hind foot!

The dude rocks! Loved his books.

Had just about all of them at one time.

Cost me a fortune to replace my collection when it was destroyed in a flood.

Gave my sci fi collection to the local library when I moved.

Anyway, I love to dream, still.












posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Vector99

The Alcubierre drive requires negative matter: not antimatter, but negative matter. Negative matter and negative energy are theoretical at this point.


It requires compression of space in front of the craft and expansion of it in the back, nothing to do with negative matter or antimatter, rather a transfer of the matter from one place to another. Which is theoretically possible. The alcubierre drive is the only one that doesn't defy physics.



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

This really isn't appropriate for the aviation forum, but...

The method of doing the compression is, as of current, only possible using the negative matter. That was part of the original paper.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join