Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Dissent Tech
Door Kickers
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

Laser Jet's Toxic Interior

It turns out those scary Air Force documents are good for something other than guiding firefighters and triggering panicked headlines. They also show just how hard it would be to actually make a laser-firing 747 work.

abl_patch.jpgThe $7.3 billion Airborne Laser is the Air Force's attempt to refit a commercial 747 jet with a chemical-powered laser. But it hasn't been easy -- missed deadlines, bloated budgets, you name it.

One of the bigger problems is the chemicals needed to start the laser chain-reaction aren't exactly the most stable and healthiest things to have around: 1,000 pounds of chlorine, 1,000 pounds of ammonia, 12,000 pounds of hydrogen peroxide, 220 gallons of sulphuric acid.

They're so toxic, in fact, that the Air Force documents recommend that "all personnel must be [in the] forward [part of the plane] "during taxi, takeoff, and landing." Going to the Airborne Laser's aft "in flight is only allowed during a declared emergency, and then only for the absolute minimum duration, in Level A hazmat suit."

Now, some folks out there have been pushing the Airborne Laser, hard. They really dig the idea of energy weapons, and want to see one built, finally, after decades of promising.

I think it's safe to say that anyone visiting this site has a soft spot for ray guns. But a weapon with limited range, a handful of shots, in-flight maintenance costs of $92,000 per hour, and enough chemicals that the crew has to wear hazmat suits to stay aboard? I'd rather wait for my energy weapons, thank you very much.

(Big ups: Michael)

Comments

Why waste anymore time with this toxic avenger waiting to happen, when the H.A.A.R.P. project in Alaska can do it all. WITHOUT a toxic spill. And don't forget, not only can it microwave the nosecone radar off any and all bogeys in flight, it can induce an earthquake, or hurricane on the launch platform as well. Read the book, Angels Don't Play This H.A.A.R.P.

Posted by: Vaughn at December 23, 2006 08:11 PM


I agree... ABL's laser technology is a dead end, and will be supplanted in a few years by some sort of solid state, OLED, or similar electricity-based laser.

BUT... in the meantime, ABL serves as a good testbed for all of the *other* things that have to be developed, like the optics, fc, battle management, sensors, heat/waste management, and everything else that goes into flying a giant laser cannon.

I still suspect the reason the AF classifies it as a demonstrator is because they believe that there will eventually be production models armed with an entirely different laser.

Posted by: Big D at April 13, 2006 11:15 PM


JB just about nails my sentiment.

Posted by: Moose at April 12, 2006 04:32 PM


I can't see how it would even be remotely legal to operate such a vehicle in American airspace, let alone through the airspaces of any other sensible country.

Is there any aspect of this system that wouldn't be carried out better by a series of multiply redundant land based versions?

Posted by: Marshall at April 12, 2006 03:35 PM


Still seems worth it as a prototype. Chemical spills in the desert and ocean aren't all that bad. How much oil gets spilled there every day?

We have to do the R&D on all the components to keep our lead. If it means we make do with a nasty chemical laser to make the prototype work, so be it.

Even with a few shots it has value. How many long range missiles does North Korea have? What's the PR value of knocking a NK missile out of the air the next time they try to fly one over Japan?

Posted by: JB at April 12, 2006 12:18 PM



It's going to get banned because of chemical weapons conventions, isn't it?

Posted by: Wembley at April 12, 2006 12:14 PM


not to mention, what if one of these puppies went down in a city? talk about toxic soup...

Posted by: DS at April 12, 2006 10:27 AM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.