Laser Gunship Fires; 'Deniable' Strikes Ahead?
Boeing announced today the first ever test firing of a real-life ray gun that could become US special forces' way to carry out covert strikes with "plausible deniability."
In tests earlier this month at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, Boeing's Advanced Tactical Laser -- a modified C-130H aircraft -- "fired its high-energy chemical laser through its beam control system. The beam control system acquired a ground target and guided the laser beam to the target, as directed by ATL's battle management system."
"By firing the laser through the beam control system for the first time, the ATL team has begun to demonstrate the functionality of the entire weapon system integrated aboard the aircraft," Boeing exec Scott Fancher said, in a statement.
But what Fancher didn't mention (and what I explore over on the New Scientist web site) is that this capability will allow Special Forces to strike with maximum precision, from long distances -- without being blamed from the attacks. "Plausible deniability" is how the presentation put it.
The claim that a laser strike could be carried out without attribution appears in two separate briefing documents by Air Force personnel, describing the benefits of the new directed energy weapon.
The Advanced Tactical Laser, weighing twelve thousand pounds and mounted in a Hercules transport plane, is intended to give Special Forces Command "ultra-precision strike capability" against a wide range of ground targets. Its power is somewhere in the hundred-kilowatt range.
According to the developers, the accuracy of this weapon is little short of supernatural. They claim that the pinpoint precision can make it lethal or non-lethal at will. For example, they say it can either destroy a vehicle completely, or just damage the tires to immobilize it. The illustration shows a theoretical 26-second engagement in which the beam deftly destroys "32 tires, 11 Antennae, 3 Missile Launchers, 11 EO devices, 4 Mortars, 5 Machine Guns" -- while avoiding harming a truckload of refugees and the soldiers guarding them. It reminds me of how the Lone Ranger could always shoot the gun out an opponent's hand without injuring them; if that could really be done from an aircraft circling overhead, it would certainly be an impressive feat.
This precision should make the ATL a highly effective anti-personnel weapon, able to target (or "assassinate," depending on your politics) a specific individual in a group with sniper-like precision. A request for the Advanced Tactical Laser to be deployed to Iraq lays out the benefits:
Precision engagement of a PID [Positively Identified] insurgent by a DEW [Directed Energy Weapon] will be a highly surgical and impressively violent event. Target effects will include instantaneous burst-combustion of insurgent clothing, a rapid death through violent trauma, and more probably a morbid combination of both. It is estimated that the aftermath of a sub-second engagement by PASDEW [Precision Airborne Standoff Directed Energy Weapon] will also be an observable event leaving an impression of terrifyingly precise CF [Coalition Force] attribution in the minds of all witnesses.
While covert strike is a key part of the justification for the ATL (the budget document specifies "extremely precise covert strike"), would such an action be deniable? The attack described would seem to have quite a distinct signature, and no other nation has similar lasers ready to deploy (as far as we know).The laser is silent and invisible, and can strike at long range in darkness, so witnesses need to be aware there was a US aircraft in the area. Without any previous cases to go on, no pathologist could definitely say that a laser was involved. The injury might resemble a lightning strike more than anything else.
The second question of course is whether deniability should ever be an issue. Providing this kind of capability may encourage exactly the sort of questionable clandestine operations that have caused so much trouble in the past. And what happens when everyone starts doing it?
Of course there are other ways of carrying out covert strikes. But this is a case where advancing technology may hurl us into a future which nobody is prepared for.
(Picture: Boeing)
ALSO:
- Pentagon Looks for 'Rugged, Military Useful' Lasers
- Air Force Looks to Laser-Proof Its Weapons
- No Laser Blasters. Yet.
- Electric Laser Race Heats Up
- Russian 'Expert': Soviets Had Laser Cannons First
- Laser Gunship Blasts Beams, Preps for '08 Flight Test
- Marines Request 'Long-Range Blow Torch' for Iraq
- Lasers-Only on "Gunless" Gunship
- Air Force Eyes Energy Shields, Microwave Bombs
- Navy Pushing Laser 'Holy Grail' to Weapons Grade
- Laser Jet Zaps Animated Missiles, Spouts Jargon
- Israel's Military Shoots Down Laser Cannon
- Israelis Sue Government for Laser Cannon
- Laser Weapons Better Against Rockets?
- Second life for Laser Defense?
- Ray Gun "Holy Grail" Aims for Battlefield Strength
- Monster Truck Gets a Laser
- Laser Death Star
- Laser Weapons Closing in on Reality
- Real-Life Laser Rifle: Army Goal
- Flipper Fires Lasers in Air Force Brief
- Laser Relays Live!
- Vice vs. the Flying Lightsaber
- Laser Jet Over Oklahoma
- Congress Slashes Flying Lightsaber
- Pentagon Report: No More 'Death Rays'
- Spooky Math for "Flying Lightsaber"
Very high power. Portable. Limited firing time. Unlimited range. All you'd need is a big spinning mirror and you could vaporize a human target from space.
Seriously though, it's only invisible to the unaided eye, and if you can detect it via any kind of sensor array you will get a very good reading on the location and bearing of the aircraft. I seriously doubt they would ever want to fire it for more than a second or two at a time.
Think of the possibilities if you combined this with the "Voice of God" http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/12/the-voice-of-go.html
Subsequent to the successful firing, the testers and onlookers feasted on freshly-popped popcorn.
Sharks with freaking lazers
"We were just standing around under a cloudless sky and the fifteen guys with guns all dropped over dead. Do you think it was the US attacking us?"
*
"No, looks like a clear cut case of fifteen lightning strikes. My recommendation is to only hang around people taller then you outside the secret nuclear weapons lab."
I doubt any competent forensic pathologist would mistake the signature of this weapon. Certainly it would be substantially different from lightning.
OTOH, it should be quite a useful weapon for its psychological effects. Having Mullah Omar vaporized in the middle of a jihadist sermon might cause a bit of discomfort in the audience.
Laser-capable satellites are only steps away at this point, and those could be as big and powerful as you want. Form a corporation with needs for satellites and launch one or more dual-purpose satellites that not only fits the corporate needs (for obvious reasons) but also has laser capability, then all you need to do is fly a plane around and say "Look, we have magical lasers in airplanes!" At which point the world isn't aware that the eye in the sky can now concentrate energy and destroy you with the only justifier being "We had a laser plane deployed in the area" whether or not there is even a plane (thank you stealth).
John Moore, well depending on the maximum energy released by the laser you could either leave the pathologist or coroner with a body with severe burns and all the body fluids boiled away or a pile of dust, or even a single burn hole or a cylindrical burn through the body with a very small radius might be difficult to detect. I wonder how small of a radius the beam might be reduced to, or even how energetic. With a ray gun you either burn or achieve vaporization. Good times.
It's only a matter of time before our leaders live their entire lives deep underground... H.G. Wells was right!
I think it's only deniable for something like a Court of Law. For anything else (media, politics, public opinion, propaganda etc) there's no denying.. people bursting in flames in an area where the US is active.. no one seriously is going believe it's just a coincidence.
.
It might no be provable, but since when is that important in war? From now on every burn victim is a martyr by US atrocities..
.
Also: you can detect a laser by atmospheric scattering (when the laser hits particles in the air it diffuses), and you can 'see' that through an appropriate wavelength filter (that's why you can see the beam of a powerful coloured laser in a non-vacuum).
@ K: "Subsequent to the successful firing, the testers and onlookers feasted on freshly-popped popcorn."
.
Make that: 'freshly popped eyeballs'
Since when is a Herky-bird stealthy? The laser may be deniable, the gunship isn't...
This is rich, Axe.
Every single time I show up at Danger Room, the mantra is "laser weapons won't work, they won't work, they won't work, so they're stupid."
Today's talking points are, "Oh yeah, they will work-- and that's bad, too!"
Don't know about plausible deniability. Like most of the commenters, and the lede, DEW target effects seem to be too idiosyncratic for that.
You might be able to engage *some* targets, and/or mask target effects. IED factories, ammo dumps, ordnance, incendiary material, etc. can both cook off for any number of reasons, *and* destroy evidence of any initiator. Otherwise, common sense or basic forensics are going to identify a DEW strike.
Apart from that, a C-130's not what you'd call quiet, much less stealthy. Putting DEW on an F-35, F-22, B-2, UAV or the NGB is another matter.
Apart from that, "plausible deniability" has a pretty checkered history; it only lasts until the next news leak. And its flip side is, it leads to conspiracy theorizing, and propaganda blowback. We can look forward to the day when Al Jazeera blames house or pipeline fires on US lasers.
Still, it's an interesting capability for times and places where it might be needed most. Wouldn't call it a hammer. Might make for a pretty good scalpel.
Be there a law which forbids the building of plausibly deniable devices by the general populace, if one were so inclined? I'm sure the schematics have leaked somewhere along the lines, let's see if we can get a Wired wiki on how to build one of these machines. Perhaps make a Geek Dad event out of it, for the science fair project.
I also theorized that lasers would be undetectable - in my case for clandestine agent-satellite communication.
But then I bought that new pwoerful LED lamp for my bike, which is NOT a laser. Used it in the night and could spot the beam for 20 meters into the sky. The right (infrared ?) camera setup will easily be able to detect something as powerful as a lethal laser beam from the photons reflected from the atmospheric dust.
A B-2 with that laser will definitely reveal its position, when engaging. Then you have a fix, which can be fed to your S-300 SAM, probably with a infrared seeker.
A stealthy cruise missile is probably a much safer alternative than a hugely expensive laser. They should talk about how many pounds of chemicals are eaten up for each shot...
The navy should be interested in this, shooting down these horrible super-sonic, quickly maneuvering anti-ship missiles.
Also, ships can easily store hundreds of tons of chemicals...
Yay! No more friendly fire investigations.
The B-2 could be used with the Laser to fry enemy Radar antennae. Then the cheaper non-stealthy planes could swoop in and do the kill. I just suspect they put this thing into a Hercules because it is VERY bulky. Maybe it does not fit into a B-2.....
Steam explosions, wnyone. Would you be able to pump enough energy into someone to flash steam the water in the human body. Or is there so much energy that you are looking at a pile of dust>
Personally, I like the exploding idea, especially the odd enemy of the state.
Sort of like the pig creature in Galaxy Quest. SPLAT!
@Dave
Since I am one of those laser skeptics, at least concerning the plan the Army is pursuing to deploy them on Hummers. I think the important distinctions should be discussed.
Aircraft make more sense to use lasers than ground units. The long range, and instant hit ability is useful for a aircraft, because of long LOS. Aircraft are maintained at a central location, so laser technicians can be available to maintain them.
Aircraft are pretty much immune (at high altitude) to low-tech/low cost weapons. No one in the air force is suggesting that laser are to be used against IEDs, which is a pretty silly scenerio the army is suggesting.
There is a lot more room to mount a first generation weapons system on a plane than on a hummer.
One thing I think they are full of crap about though, is the idea that they could simultaneously target individual components, on multiple targets inside a moving convoy, from a moving platform.
Even with the best video game interface, which are better than the best military weapon interface, it would be an extremely difficult challenge.
Good luck with that claim
Not to mention that our Nerf military requires authorization, to fire every bullet, and engage every target.
I can see it now
Permission to Engage Antenna on tank #1
....
Granted
Permission to Engage Antenna on tank #2
....
....
Granted
Permission to ordinance on Scud lanucher #1
....
....
Negative
....
Disbale antenna only.
Uh. command the convoy has entered a tunnel...lets start this over again.
All the talk of "identifying" the target, through various means is making me LOL. Are you guys serious?
If this laser is even 20 miles out of strike range, good luck trying to target it. It'll be gone by the time that happens. Also, go ahead and target it. Fine. It'll just turn everything trying to target it to dust in about 10 seconds flat. It could be VERY effective. Which means the military probably won't employ it...
Great! A 100KW laser is a good start, I hope it works !
However, initially they won't be able to take out anything meaningful with it at that power level (example below) If you only have several seconds of a well focused beam. You need a good 15 to 30 seconds on the same target area to do serious damage. 100KW for one second from 10,000 feet in the sky may set someones clothes on fire, but it won't take out a car.
Still, it will be a huge step forward, in terms of practical laser weapons if they can get this to focus a spot of even several centimeters in diameter from 10,000 feet!
power example :
[take a piece of 30cm sheet metal,1/4 inch thick and put it in your 1KW regular microwave oven for 100 seconds, and this will be the equivalent of a 100KW laser fired for 1 second in ideal conditions. What you will notice is that it will be very very hot, but by no means destroyed.]
S.O.L. from Akira was cool.
Kaaaaaaneeedaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !!!!
lol.
I'm surprised that Lazlo Hollyfeld and K are the only ones whose posts refer to the 1985 movie "Real Genius". If you haven't seen it, rent it. This would appear to be a case of life imitating Hollywood (the weapon looks exactly like the one in the film), but without the benefits of supergeek pranks and large-breasted hairdressers going down water slides.
wow. this sounds awesome. way to go boeing. I cant wait to see this.
thanks
Interesingly enough, there are no moral grouds for "plausible deniability".
Once again, the US has embraced their inner Nazi fetish.
I wasn't saying that the C-130 is stealth-capable... that's just dumb. What I was implying was that the next generation, or the next iteration of propaganda, will prolly sell this thing as being loadable on a stealth platform so there doesn't even have to be a radar signature from a plane for practically invisible bolts of melty laser goodness to be flying about. Natural progression...
"If this laser is even 20 miles out of strike range, good luck trying to target it."
Heh, they'll just shoot back with another laser, ground stationed and more powerful. We can't stop nuclear proliferation, and that's big, expensive , and noisy as hell. There are several countries that have physicists smart enough to replicate this and can do it quietly in a lab.
Good thing is that we're getting good at drones, cause you'll have a hard time getting pilots in the cockpit at all after the first few get flash fried.
@ ArmsRace
The answer is obviously to make planes out of mirrors... they can arm them with lollipop love bombs and popsicle ATA missiles! Maybe we should arm ground troops with bowls of kittens and dandelion helmets, too.
It's sad that life is an arms race. Will we eventually develop a technology that makes the arms race obsolete, aside from one that wipes out all life?
@ArmsRace: Good point. Put this on a drone, add some stealth, and then they're really fried. For practical purposes, no enemy of the US can currently afford this research. So for now, we own it.
@Adam V: Bowls of kittens, the extreme opposite of our constant quest for effective killing tools, I like it, (unless the kittens were infected prior with a biological weapon, or are to be brain-controlled to scratch the hell out of whomever handles them) indeed all of human existence appears to have been one big arms race.
Perhaps that's what's behind the Luddite philosophy, the anti-technology people, don't use any technology, because all technology was originally created as a way to better kill others or better destroy something, and by utilizing it, you're saying that something good has come out of the countless lives lost and therefore, you've condoned the atrocities and condone further atrocities. Extreme, unreasonable, implausible, but an interresting point no less.
I believe there was a Star Trek Voyager episode concerning this, concerning the debate over whether Nazi scientific research should be utilized, although it was gained at the experimentation upon thousands of helpless victims. It's the "you've got to break some eggs to make an omlette" concept. If you want the benefits of modern medicine and refrigeration and automocars, you've also got to smile at bombs exploding in childrens faces, necrotizing gasses melting civilians and soldiers alike. You've got to laugh and cheer at those who die at the hands of terrorists if you also want to experience this newfound push for electric cars and energy independence that the oil crisis/mismanaged war money has spurred. Evil creates heroes, and to celebrate a hero is to celebrate the evil that created that hero. Memorial day is a memorial to honor atrocities as much as it is a memorial to honor the sacrifices in overcoming of atrocities. You can't have bravery without depravity, you can't have war heroes without war. To celebrate a war hero is to celebrate war.
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
I figure they've increased the output to six megawatts.
With the gas tanks they've designed the beam would only last for forty seconds. What good is that?
Logistics, logistics, logistics is the real killer app here. More precisely, disrupting enemy logistics.
Who wants to drive the next Hezbollah missile resupply train from Iran? They seem to have recently had a bad time making it across Syria.
And what would Syria or Iran say, you made our illegal missiles go boom? Waaah, we can't violate international arms embargoes as easily as we used to? Cry me a river.
"I figure they've increased the output to six megawatts.
With the gas tanks they've designed the beam would only last for forty seconds. What good is that?"
Um, according to the picture, that's
14 more seconds than you need to disable a tank column, giving you more than a 50% margin of error. Not bad for Death Ray version 1.0.
Heck, why can't we just blame it on the camel drivers?
Indeed!
I can see one of the planes with the name "Real Genius."
This is one of our family's favorite films. (Yeah, we're ALL geeks!)
Nice fairytale, pity no one seems to have thought of the backscatter visual damage caused when you hit just about anything with a laser of reasonable power.
I can almost guarantee that is the above strike was real, all of the soldiers would be blinded from the backscatter off the targets
The general non-usa consensus is that laser blinding weapons are not legal, but hey lets not worry about that, after all, is has deniability! (this plane just flew past and everything failed/blew up/etc, must be a coincidence..)
I also note the path happily seems to skirt the people, since this is a continuous beam weapon, I wonder how often that happy eventuality occurs..
The orbital idea is an order or two of magnitude away. There is no "unlimited range" in atmosphere; the slight scattering adds up, until all that's left of your MW hot beam is a few watts of dim light. But if you can get 20 or 100 miles out of it, you're good to go!
iZealot;
What a mishmash of b&w reasoning! Lots of logical errors, but start by looking up "the excluded middle".
Freakin' awesome!!!! Time for a terrorist BBQ - well done, very well done!
Seriously, if this 20 watt IR laser can burn the heck out of flesh (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp2Jvg65NBs)
imagine what this monster laser can do!
Basically, unfocused lasers (this laser would be focused, but probably not down to a tiny spot as is done in industrial laser applications, like to cut metal) tend to ablate the target material - whether metal, wood or flesh. For a human target, the beam (if not focused down to a pin point, which would be impossible from an distance away) would probably end up vaporizing flesh. You wouldn't need to punch a hole thru someone, as in sci-fi films - just hit them in the head - and half their head would be gone!
One other thing - how come Boeing is getting all the credit here - Northrup Grumman built the actual laser, did they not?
So when do we take out the first wedding party?
Now we know what NASA did with that B747 they've been driving all over New Mexico with the top down...
Air Force needing some kick with Congress to get some money may have pulled this out of closet... Just as Army and Navy are getting more money for people... Hmmm Pentagon Games-!
This is old news...
@Capt Zot: When are you planning to get married?
hi
"Neat, WE HAVE BECOME ZEUS! BOW BEFORE US AND TREMBLE OR FACE OUR WRATH!! *BZZZZZZZZRT*"
What's this "we" shit paleface? You have about zero control over how this is used.
The idea that this is deniable and the entire desire to have deniablility are both stupid. Stupid on the level of being out of touch with reality since it will be obvious who did it. Stupid from the ethical point of view, since any action we should take we should be taking credit for.
Third this is going to make for another problem which is worse. Every time their is a lightening strike or some accident occurs that blows up a electrical substation, refinery, or ammo dump there is going to be suspicion that we did it. Not only will there be suspicion but there will be "plausible accusability".
This site edited out my html. That first sentence was blockquote from the first commenter that I was criticizing.
The main problem for this stuff remains the energy density of your storage system (i.e. batteries), and how quickly you can discharge the power. Lokeed Martin partecipation in the ultracap firm EEstor does sound to me so much like a "we're gonna give your GIs a brand-new backbag". Also the MIT nanotube ultracap can do it (I mean to discharge a lot of power in seconds) ..but also normal lithium batteries are becoming more and more interesting (look@ the torque of the killacycle! :)
No more need of those complex and toxic chemical bursters, no more need of a very secret know-how. A good question for a WIRED editorial: is "fry your neighbor" gonna be the new decade fashion?
History of Directed Energy Weapons
http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=4329
Lets get some of these aimed at Iran, ASAP! (-:
Although I suppose it will just be a matter of time before some US politician "leaks" the technology to our enemies for his/her own political purposes.
So how many Kim Jong Il impersonators do you think will be standing at NK military parades once this thing goes operational?
IMO this planet has way too many people on it already, so barbecuing terrorists and evildoers not only makes the world safer for America, it makes Gaia happier! Win win!!
What about backscatter off of surfaces? Unless you are wearing goggles, even fractional backscatter can blind you. This has already happened in Russia, where a laser light show using powerful lasers caused retinal damage as the beams scattered off raindrops into the show attendees eyes.
What, pray tell would be a future that anyone is prepared for?
What, pray tell would be a future that anyone is prepared for?
The perfect weapon to deal with the Russian forces inside Georgia.
Get the hell out or face the music.
in fact, dealing with the Russians inside of Georgia is the perfect test bed for this weapon.
This technology is not new. What do think caused all those spontaneous combustion incidents? And don't even say the US does not experiment on it's citizens.
This is hot, Boeing is giving me a semiwood with all these awsome new toys
How many of you believe that the stealth was designed in the 90's? if you believe that, I've got a statue to sell you in NY harbor. And, how many of you believe that this technology hasn't all ready been in use for years? For example N. Koreas' botched missile test. One minute flying along just fine, the next minute "splat". Lazers or maybe an EMP gun....
come on America, are we seriously that bad. Let me ask you a question, why do we need "plausible deniability" to begin with?
Oh yea, I forgot, it is for the times we overthrow elected governments like we have done over and over and over (Iran in 1950's comes to mind)
Then we sit back and say they hate us because of our freedom's.
We have turned into the evil empire. We do not care about anything or anyone, as long as we can sustain our lifestyle.
Nation of Christians my eye. We are everything Jesus warned about in the Beatitudes
p.s - oh yea, for the comment about using it on Russia in Georgia. You would never know it from our media, but Georgia attacked South Ossetia first, killed over 1700 people in a massive rocket attack.
I guess the terrorist card does not work as well anymore so we need Russia back as the enemy. Pretty nice that one of McCain's leading men was a foreign agent for Georgia and was paid over 800k.
1+1 really does equal 2 people
So what if we are the evil empire. Maybe we should embrace the evil and damn everyone else. What has the rest of the world done for us? NOTHING. So why should I give a damn about them? So what if they hate me. I would rather be feared than respected.
Oh, and another thing. Why is it that one minute all you moonbats are saying Bush is an idiot and then the next your saying he's the greatest Maccivellian strategist in the universe? The way I see ityou can't have it both ways. That's kind of like positive being negative at the same time. You can't be stupid and a genius.
Anyhoo, I thought we were taking about flying death lasers, not the Russian Georgia thing.
"Oh, and another thing. Why is it that one minute all you moonbats are saying Bush is an idiot and then the next your saying he's the greatest Maccivellian strategist in the universe? The way I see ityou can't have it both ways."
If you can't see it, you're a moron. Bush *is* an idiot. Cheney and the others around Bush are the evil Machiavellians.
They're a package deal. That's why Bush wouldn't appear before the 9/11 commission unless he could sit on Cheney's lap. Cheney and the rest do the thinking. Bush is just the useful idiot (who is no longer useful).
@ArmsRace: Good point. Put this on a drone, add some stealth, and then they're really fried. For practical purposes, no enemy of the US can currently afford this research. So for now, we own it.
Posted by: Philopoemen | Aug 14, 2008 9:33:46 AM
That is pretty short-sighted thinking. China owns and produces quite a bit of our assets as well as quite a few other foreign agents. No money? WE don't have the money. We're on borrowed time.
It is arrogant and foolish in the extreme to believe that no other country could copy or defeat this technology as soon as we develop it. China has been most effective at getting at our secrets as well. Hsu, anyone?
I'm just glad Boeing is on our side...
@Adam V -- "Laser-capable satellites are only steps away at this point, and those could be as big and powerful as you want"
Not by a long way. The cost of placing a large payload in orbit is very high. More significantly the cost of energy in space is high. This weapon is a chemical laser. A satellite-weapon would have to use a solar energy collection and a storage solution that could produce high-power output. This would be heavier still than the chemical-equivalent. There would of course also be a greater problem with atmospheric refraction and scattering. Finally the political costs of placing such a thing in orbit would likely be huge.
@ ManInALift: The whole point of what I said was not an argument of the technical aspects of orbit-based laser capability, it was the ability to accomplish it in a way that could turn deniability and blame into a third degree of complexity... and let's not be silly, we both know that American government will throw countless billions away for/into defense and defense technology (see "War on Terror"). I know nothing about laser technology, but I do know that most things humans really, truly WANT to happen we can MAKE happen one way or another. Especially with the unlimited financial and resource backing of a superpower. Once again... talking about ethical/political aspects... don't know anything about technicals... though honestly I've read the ceaseless comments and despite all of the hits on "refraction" and "diffusion" and what have you I previously felt no need to qualify or defend my unharmed claims as nothing truly called them into question.
This weapon is what they really used to melt all the Nazi's in Raider's of the Lost Ark. They can codename the weapon "Wrath of Allah"
"Georgia attacked South Ossetia first" Yes they did, since it is part of their territory.
Did not Russia do the same in Cheznia to take back their territory from sepratists.
What Russia is doing now is invading another contry, one that wants nothing to do with them following the fall of the soviet union. But Putin wants to rebuild the union, the rhetoric towards Poland only confirms this.
Test the weapon system at will, help the Georgians out. Let the "lightning" damage begin.
It would be a very satisfying weapon if you could just make their head explode during a hate filled speech.
The voice gets high pitched, the face becomes red with anger and emotion. They shout some anti American sentiment, and Splat! The head explodes, apparently from their own rage. In front of hundreds of witnesses who saw nothing but the effects of hate.
Thank you very much for the great information.
Thanks
511 tactical
LOL! I vote for the mad Mullah head explosion during a hate speech. We've waited too long for that.
Folks, we are not the evil empire. We are the only credible power in the West capable of keeping the evil empire at bay.
This weapon should be used in Georgia and Iran immediately.
Cool site keep doing it.
Kaboonfootprint
Cool site more power.
Kabonfootprint
AMA FIRIN MA LAZOR
Oh, I just LURVE the image showing a sample engagement.
Let's see... the problems start with the fact that the vehicles in question are Leopard II's and Dingos, which pretty much identifies the convoy in question as German. I'm not sure why they would choose this as their sample, but anyway...
And then let's consider the engagement in general terms. It claims to kill 66 individual targets in 26 seconds, which is almost three a second. Let's say that your laser can actually kill an antenna in that time period, how exactly does one aim it that fast? Clearly the aiming system is (electro-)optical if it's aiming at bumps on targets, so who's the super-duper-man that can accurately point that fast.
But best yet, I really like the way they manage to fire at the tires of the frontmost Dingo _through_ the vehicle body. It's not just deadly, it's _magical_!
Like the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Wait, no, those were imaginary, not magical. And what, it costs only six billion? What a deal!
Maury
web sites:
Neat,
WE HAVE BECOME ZEUS! BOW BEFORE US AND TREMBLE OR FACE OUR WRATH!! *BZZZZZZZZRT*