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.

 

Solid-state heat-capacity laser (SSHCL) a mini MTHEL

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 01:59 AM
link   
www.llnl.gov...

Basically a more compact version of MTHEL. Can fit on vehicles as small as hybrid-electric Humvees, FCS. It can shoot down short-range
artillery, rockets, and mortars. The Army should start testing it in 2007, with it entering service next decade.

[edit on 31-3-2005 by NWguy83]

[edit on 31-3-2005 by NWguy83]




posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Wow, talk about "bow and arrow".



posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 03:24 AM
link   
I often wonder about these claims of being able to shoot down artillery shells. An artillery shell is heavily armoured to withstand the forces of firing in the chamber. For a laser to be able to penetrate this tough exterior in seconds seems IMO beyond the capabilites of portable lasers.



posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   
we can never be sure what its true capabilities are unless we see it ourselves, it may burn through the artillery shell because of high intense heat compare to the heat inside a cannon.



posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
I often wonder about these claims of being able to shoot down artillery shells. An artillery shell is heavily armoured to withstand the forces of firing in the chamber. For a laser to be able to penetrate this tough exterior in seconds seems IMO beyond the capabilites of portable lasers.


The prototype laser was able to burn through 2cm steel in 6 seconds. And it was only 13kW. The full version will have more than 100kW.



posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 03:55 PM
link   
There is a video of it burning a hole in the artillery shell, it has been showed several times on the History Channel but if you search online you will find it. The military is looking to have these portable laser on HUMVEE's by 2013.



posted on Apr, 1 2005 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow

Originally posted by rogue1
I often wonder about these claims of being able to shoot down artillery shells. An artillery shell is heavily armoured to withstand the forces of firing in the chamber. For a laser to be able to penetrate this tough exterior in seconds seems IMO beyond the capabilites of portable lasers.


The prototype laser was able to burn through 2cm steel in 6 seconds. And it was only 13kW. The full version will have more than 100kW.


That may be so but a shell is spinning several thousand times a second. making it impossible for the laser to focus on just one spot. Therefore it would have to penetrate far more then 2cm of steel.

I have also seen video of the laser shooting down artillery shells, but I'd like to know just what type of shells they are.

If this laser is this effective it would make an even more potent AA defnce system. It could take out planes and all sorts of air to ground weaponry.



posted on Apr, 1 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Rouge 1 you're late to the game the USAF is already designing and flying prototypes of 747's with lasers strong enough to take out ICBM's in their boost stage or close rage nuclear missiles. The 747 laser will have a range of about 200 miles.

Also the lasers are intense enough to puncture an artillery shell, On the History Channel and the I have seen video of it burning a hole in 1 inch of carbon steel in about 4 second. Plus the shell is spinning but like I said they can burn a hole through just about anything in a matter of seconds, and instead of bring a hole since the shell is spinning it will essentially be cut in half.

And this is the new S2A defense system the USN, USAF, US Army all have active current projects and systems using lasers to shoot down missiles, rockets or artillery shells. Shooting down jets is harder because simply burning a hole in it wont bring it down immediately it would take longer to try and take down a jet.

Airborne Laser






posted on Apr, 1 2005 @ 11:57 PM
link   
westy, I've heard of the ABL. However the ABL is completely different technology using a chemical pumped laser which takes up a large volume. However I believe the US is having trouble refinging the targetting systems for the laser.
The 200 mile range is iffy, too much depends on the atmospheric conditions and air density.
It would be interesting to see aht the MHTEL could do if it was scaled up to ABL size.

Chemical lasers IMO will be superceded by solid state technology, as cpacitors and power supplies become more efficient.

PS. An intersting thought - Coule the MTHEL be mounted on an SSN providing a moderate AD against helicopters as a last result. The laser could be mounted on the periscope in some way. If it can shoot down armoured projectiles then a helicopter would be easy meat.
The same could be said for fleet point defense against threats.



posted on Apr, 2 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   
I don't know what it would do if it was scaled up to the ABL size. And Rouge 1 the 747 would fly above the clouds and target the missiles on their boost stage how much atmospheric disruption is there a those heights?


The U.S. Army has built and tested a humvee equipped with a laser gun turret that can quickly destroy unexploded munitions and roadside bombs. The system, called Zeus-HLONS (HMMWV Laser Ordnance Neutralization System), uses an industrial solid state laser, normally used to cut metal, but can also ignite explosives up to 300 meters away. Normally, engineers have to approach such munitions (shells, cluster bombs aircraft bombs) or roadside bombs, place explosives next to it, then move away, trailing a detonator wire behind them, and then set off the explosive to destroy the bomb or unexploded munitions. Using the Zeus laser is a lot cheaper (a few cents per laser shot) and safer than the traditional method. Zeus is particularly useful when you have an area with a lot of unexploded munitions just lying about. The munitions are often unstable, meaning that just picking them up could set them off. The Zeus system can be fired up to 2,000 times a day. Last year, a Zeus-HLONS was sent to Afghanistan for six months last year, where it destroyed 200 items, including 51 in one 100 minute period.




This is not to be confused wit the THEL mobile laser this is only for ground targets not air ones

And like I said when the THEL is portable enough and small enough to be placed on Humvee’s around 2010, then USN might put some of them on their ships.


[edit on 2-4-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Apr, 2 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
PS. An intersting thought - Coule the MTHEL be mounted on an SSN providing a moderate AD against helicopters as a last result. The laser could be mounted on the periscope in some way. If it can shoot down armoured projectiles then a helicopter would be easy meat.
The same could be said for fleet point defense against threats.


Why laser for submarines? It is not difficult to equip the sub with AA misilles. And they can be also shot underwater. And if laser than solid state laser. Nuclear sub has a LOT of electric energy.



posted on Apr, 2 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Does anyone know if a solid state laser is affected when used underwater? Or what it does to the water?



posted on Apr, 2 2005 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Does anyone know if a solid state laser is affected when used underwater? Or what it does to the water?


Of course it is affected. Thats the reason, why it is so dark 50m underwater. But I heard rumors that Russians were using some kind of special "blue-green" laser for Shvkal torpedo targeting (blue-green light "travels" longer underwater). But use it for destructive purposes underwater? NO way.



posted on Apr, 2 2005 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Well a solid Tate laser is not really light, if you try to deflect it with ha mirror or any reflective surface it wont be reflect it will burn right through it.
So I'm not a Laser Physics but I wanted to know if it turns the water to instant steam or what?



posted on Apr, 2 2005 @ 11:26 PM
link   
hmmmm, tough question. not sure. If I had to guess I would say no, i dont think the water would turn into steam, I think the water would effect its range, however i believe that it would work. Example(ish): if you turn on a propane torch and look by the flame it appear hazzy/wavy, much like behind a jet aircraft, I have seen videos of the laser and it heats up the rocket with in second, and it explodes...you cannot see the laser beam with your own eyes, you need infared. If the laser heat effected the air it would look wavy, but thats not the case. So thats why I think it would work in water, but just like how the atmosphere impacts the lasers range, water would to...only it being more dense it would impact the range much more.

is ZUES one of a kind, or do they have more of it? I believe theres only one.?
Which is currently in Iraq.


"According to spokesman at Headquarters, Department of the Army, ZEUS is in Iraq as part of a three-vehicle convoy protection concept being evaluated now," DD adds.





posted on Apr, 2 2005 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Well a solid Tate laser is not really light, if you try to deflect it with ha mirror or any reflective surface it wont be reflect it will burn right through it.

is that a guess or a fact?

The ABL has a sophisticated nose, consisting of several mirrors which the laser bounces of before heading to destroy the missile.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
hmmmm, tough question. not sure. If I had to guess I would say no, i dont think the water would turn into steam, I think the water would effect its range, however i believe that it would work.


I don't think that is true as, a laser is just concentrated radiation and as in air it would heat up the air in the path which it travels. In air due to its sparse distribution air molecules heat up and form small convective current of hot air around the immediate beam. I would think that the same think would happen in water and the water (which is presumably below saturation temp as deep sea) in the path of the laser would be exposed to an intense beam of radiation which would cause the water to 'split' i.e. split H20 into H & OH since OH requires much higher energy to split as water does not absorb UV part of the radiation. Along with this, you can expect to see a heavy convective current built up and also many other auxiliary reactions (& this is for pure water). In this case as we are using a military laser of very high intensity I think most likely their would be an implosion of the water molecules along the path of the laser and this would cause some serious cavitation which would be enough to alert all the submarines in a 100km radius of your exact position (exaggeration
). Laser used under water would be a terribly inefficient as most of the energy would be used to heat up water and very little would be left to cause and damages. The blue-green laser which is rumored to be used must of very low intensity and is used only for target identification.
Another interesting but absurd question is in the oceans the water is mostly filled with particulate matter and is not as clean as air is on the surface not the mention aquatic sea life and varying thermals under water wouldn't one need to overcome all these to fire the laser successfully?



The Navy is also evaluating laser systems for use by surfaced submarines. Since nuclear submarines have abundant onboard electrical power, solid-state lasers are favored over chemical lasers, the by-product of which--spent chemicals--would have to be stored until the submarine could put back into port. The advantage of using lasers on board submarines is that they are a munition that would be stealthy, Navy officials reported.

"You can surface, hit a target miles away with a laser, and no one knows you were ever there," a Pentagon official observed. Ideal would be a system that could be fitted on the sub's conning tower or periscope, so only a fraction of the vessel would have to be above the waterline to conduct an attack.

AirForce Association



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Thanks for the article IAF, seems like my theory about mounting it on subs was pretty spot on.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 12:58 AM
link   
thanks for the link, IAF101, it pretty much touches on all the major laser projects currently being looked into.


you might be right(about the water/laser)...but I have a feeling we will never know.

besides, we all know the future of underwater warfare will be supercavitating torpedoes.



posted on Apr, 3 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

is ZUES one of a kind, or do they have more of it? I believe theres only one.?
Which is currently in Iraq.


I think Zeus is a prototype that is only good for land based targets, I think the military does not want to produce more of them because they have a line of Humvees equip end with lasers for both ground and air targets coming in the near future.

And that would be awesome, I don't care if it was affective or not just dong that to the water would be a hell of thing to film. And also would lasers in space have better rage and power than ones used in the earths atmosphere since there is nothing the lasers path.

[edit on 3-4-2005 by WestPoint23]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join