New Laser Weapon Blasts Spy Drones Out of the Sky

reply to post by Phage


Yes, I recalled it wrong. In 1995 there was an international meeting to ban blinding anti-personnel laser weapons (CCW Protocol IV). However only 20 countries ratified it. USA and Russia are not on the list.
Anyway it has nothing to do with anti-air laser systems.

This is so much like my dream it's scary. A while back I dreamed that there were both laser shooting cameras and robots.

Here is an article describing the humvee mounted version: NewScientist

Another on an F35 mounted version from 2002: NewScientist

Originally posted by rangersdad
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

Question: Are the sensors inside the drones or is the laser system detecting them with a type of radar???

The article I read in Scientific American magazine online said they hooked the laser up to a Phalanx tracking system.

Also said the military wouldn't even be looking at these systems if they didn't at least double the range over existing weapons.

They also showed a combined laser and gatling gun Phalanx system for ships.

So, you can see where this is going. A little while ago there were threads about supposed "carrier killing" russian and chinese missiles. Now you're seeing the U.S. technological response. Speed of light beats hypersonic ...

article


[edit on 7/20/2010 by centurion1211]

reply to post by centurion1211


Yes i think one of the two stinger mounts is replaced with the laser, leaving one stinger and the impressive gum.

This explains the 'missile mounted laser' quote from the journalist.


[edit on 20/7/2010 by LightFantastic]

Fantastic Post, im invisioning this system powered by the Reactors on our SSN's, a mobile secret missle defence system, with a greatley inhanced and refined capability with the power availible. A great article by scientific american about the system.
www.scientificamerican.com...

reply to post by Etherguide

I think the Geneva Convention does prohibit weapons designed to blind. So these weapons are designed to take out missiles etc and damage to human eyes will be 'accidental'.

Hi Boondock Saint, I'm not trying to derail your thread - honestly

but about the drone..........

Do they have the ability to hover silently, without displacing air and to just disappear? If so I want to know WHY one was hovering in my back yard in the middle of nowhere! I almost said that I'm not near any base but as the crow flies I'm less than 50 miles from Camp David and Raven Rock.

If they can't hover silently without displacing air or vanish unseen then what the heck did I see?

Thread

Description of event:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/81f69406ea83.jpg[/atsimg]

Edit to fix link... I'll learn how to do them right someday, I hope.
Edit again to get OP right... sheesh, just shoot me now!


[edit on 20/7/2010 by SeenMyShare]


[edit on 20/7/2010 by SeenMyShare]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

The tracking system is the real secret. It's probably an optical system but it has to keep the beam on the target long enough to burn it. The target was flying straight line, slowly, so it wasn't really tough. Evasive maneuvers and higher speeds would make it tougher.

I was thinking "Wow, this is perfect if the enemy remains straight and level. What a perfect weapon against ill trained pilots." But I presume they either didn't want to be embarrassed by a miss while everyone watched, or perhaps they do not want the world to know how versatile the tracking system is. I can see its effectiveness against projectile weapons as well, ie mortar and large artillery and what not. But they already have a land based version of the Phalanx System already installed, they have been testing it out in theater with great success, so why a laser?

Cool video none the less!

Originally posted by LightFantastic
reply to post by Etherguide

 

I think the Geneva Convention does prohibit weapons designed to blind. So these weapons are designed to take out missiles etc and damage to human eyes will be 'accidental'.

Does it actually say blind? I know it talks about maiming.

reply to post by arcnaver


No i dont think it does so my statement was a bit misleading (apart from the later 1980 or 95 protocols) but if you were blinded you would have been maimed. I think the later protocols were to distingush between different uses of lasers on weapons.