If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   The US Navy is just "two years away" from laser weapons like "they had in Star Trek," claims top admiral. No word where the bayonets will be mounted   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 128
    More: Cool, laser weapons, U.S. Navy, Office of Naval Research, naval ship, energy weapon, lasers, Wired  
•       •       •

4214 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 Oct 2012 at 10:40 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



128 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-23 08:17:00 PM  
Yeah... Just as soon as they field the rail gun, right?

I know they are doing some cool stuff, but 2 years? That doesn't seem very realistic. The sea trials and stuff would take that long and that's after they finally build it.
 
2012-10-23 08:20:38 PM  
Are they breech loaders or muzzle loaders?
 
2012-10-23 08:29:25 PM  
We had better build more ships because the ocean isn't getting any smaller and China is investing heavily in lasers and anti-lasers.
 
2012-10-23 08:31:04 PM  
Victory at Sea meets Laser Bowie.
 
2012-10-23 08:31:15 PM  

NewportBarGuy: I know they are doing some cool stuff, but 2 years? That doesn't seem very realistic. The sea trials and stuff would take that long and that's after they finally build it.


johngonglewski.com
Air Force has done it already. Just a matter of putting it on a ship.
 
2012-10-23 08:35:10 PM  

cretinbob: Air Force has done it already. Just a matter of putting it on a ship.


I haven't read Proceedings in a few years. Last I checked they were saying pretty much the same thing. I hope they get it right because the cost savings would be really great. Well, I think it will. I hope it will.

I'm on board for anything that makes us stronger, more affordable, and ready to respond to any threat. It's hard to get all of that. Especially the cost savings part. heh...

Then again. We probably need more horses and bayonets.
 
2012-10-23 08:45:34 PM  
Lasers? Those won't even penetrate their navigational deflectors.
 
2012-10-23 09:23:46 PM  
It's at the systems integration and test phase at the contractor so it could be 2 years away if a giant bucket of money is given to them. I'm sure though that it would have no effect against a steel hull or a really fast moving target so it will only be used in conjunction with preexisting CIWS.
 
2012-10-23 09:39:46 PM  
Meaning, they have this now, two years until the next big thing.
 
2012-10-23 09:43:37 PM  

Tr0mBoNe: I'm sure though that it would have no effect against a steel hull or a really fast moving target so it will only be used in conjunction with preexisting CIWS.


Then it seems like a giant waste of money if they are going to keep Phalanx. I support them bringing the project to technical completion so we can learn more, but if it's just going to complement the current system that works quite well, what's the point?
 
2012-10-23 09:44:10 PM  

Tr0mBoNe: It's at the systems integration and test phase at the contractor so it could be 2 years away if a giant bucket of money is given to them. I'm sure though that it would have no effect against a steel hull or a really fast moving target so it will only be used in conjunction with preexisting CIWS.


click on links in articles

yes
 
2012-10-23 10:04:20 PM  

Mentat: We had better build more ships because the ocean isn't getting any smaller and China is investing heavily in lasers and anti-lasers.


images.sodahead.com


Back at ya'! 


/hot
 
2012-10-23 10:58:38 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Yeah... Just as soon as they field the rail gun, right?


I farking love Eraser.
 
2012-10-23 11:08:48 PM  

FishyFred: I farking love Eraser.


If I could have one fantasy weapon, I'm not sure if it'd be the 'EM' gun from Eraser or the ZF1 from Fifth Element. Actually, I'll go with the ZF1.
 
2012-10-23 11:09:32 PM  
No word where the bayonets will be mounted

On the business end of course.
 
2012-10-23 11:13:09 PM  
No word where the bayonets will be mounted

Less than 24 hours and this one's already tired to death. I guess Obammster finally got that zinger in he so desperately wanted. Too bad Ambassador Stevens wasn't around to enjoy it.
 
2012-10-23 11:14:44 PM  
mmwwhahaha, i'm finally getting my octopi with lasers!
 
2012-10-23 11:15:40 PM  
i884.photobucket.com

on the end of the lasgun, where else?
 
2012-10-23 11:20:15 PM  
If you just sharpen the bit in the middle of the emitter bell, and put the bell on a retractable spring thingy, you could make the early Trek laser rifle into a bayonet-aser:

i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-23 11:25:02 PM  
I, for one, am looking forward to our Narwhal class submarines.
 
2012-10-23 11:25:47 PM  
Gee, if they put directed energy weapons on a satellite, I wonder how they'd test them...

api.ning.com 

...nah - it's aliens.
 
2012-10-23 11:31:48 PM  
Well these lasers are for warships, subby. So you should be asking if they still reinforce the prow like they did on old roman barges.

/The thought of an aircraft carrier Commander shouting "RAMMING SPEED!" does sound awesome...
 
2012-10-23 11:40:07 PM  

Triumph: Gee, if they put directed energy weapons on a satellite, I wonder how they'd test them...

 

...nah - it's aliens.


It's actually art students with boards.

Nah, its military space lasers.
 
2012-10-23 11:44:25 PM  
So, who's bringing the popcorn?
 
2012-10-23 11:46:34 PM  
Welcome to 30 years ago.....

i291.photobucket.com

IT'S STAR WARS DAMMIT

/we start bombing in 5 minutes
 
2012-10-23 11:53:52 PM  
"Top admirals" are usually old farts that will believe any and all bullsh*t weapons contractors are trying to sell them.
 
2012-10-23 11:55:35 PM  
They didn't have lasers in Star Trek, Admiral.

/except in the pilot episode
 
2012-10-24 12:00:17 AM  

Keyser_Soze_Death: No word where the bayonets will be mounted


Yeoman.
 
2012-10-24 12:02:03 AM  
My stats teacher in college had worked on laser weapons for some defense contractor. He said they were mostly used to take down missiles and such. I asked specifically about weaponized lasers. That was almost 10 years ago.
 
2012-10-24 12:06:43 AM  
The thing is, you can put whatever crazy sort of weaponry you want on a ship, its a nice big open platform with a nice big powerplant. Its my understanding however that given how we currently use our navy, long range ship to shore bombardment, laser weapons would be impractical as they require line of sight. Given modern satellite capabilities, id think even ship to ship engagement would take place over the horizon, making rail guns and anything that can fire parabolically the preferred weapon.


Mentat: We had better build more ships because the ocean isn't getting any smaller and China is investing heavily in lasers and anti-lasers.


Mirrors?
 
2012-10-24 12:10:09 AM  
Just remember to keep enough room to hold the horses,
you never know when you'll have to do sea to land mobile attack.
 
2012-10-24 12:14:03 AM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: They didn't have lasers in Star Trek, Admiral.

/except in the pilot episode


This is the correct answer
 
2012-10-24 12:17:05 AM  

Ghastly: Lasers? Those won't even penetrate their navigational deflectors.


I laughed
 
2012-10-24 12:27:41 AM  

Tr0mBoNe: It's at the systems integration and test phase at the contractor so it could be 2 years away if a giant bucket of money is given to them.


Is that all? No sweat! We give giant buckets of money to defense contractors all the time!

Comon with the pew pew.
 
2012-10-24 12:30:15 AM  

shotglasss: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

Less than 24 hours and this one's already tired to death. I guess Obammster finally got that zinger in he so desperately wanted. Too bad Ambassador Stevens wasn't around to enjoy it.


Wow, it really hurt your feelings to see Romney talked to like the adolescent he is, didn't it? I've never seen Obama's 'Parent Face' before, you know the one where you are explaining to your teenager that he can't spend the night at his girlfriend's house even though her mother thinks it's OK? Yeah, he had the 'I can't believe that I had to explain THIS to an adult.' look.
 
2012-10-24 12:32:12 AM  

gas giant: "Top admirals" are usually old farts that will believe any and all bullsh*t weapons contractors are trying to sell them.


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com

Top. Admirals.
 
2012-10-24 12:33:56 AM  

justtray: My stats teacher in college had worked on laser weapons for some defense contractor. He said they were mostly used to take down missiles and such. I asked specifically about weaponized lasers. That was almost 10 years ago.


That's all I've heard about, too. Ones for frying the guidance system on a missile, but not offensive ones. I'm really curious how you responsibly account for a light weapon that pretty much goes on forever... At least a bullet falls to earth, and a missile runs out of fuel if it misses. Admiral Jackapenny fires his ship based laser and misses, and we might set of an interstellar war... :-0

Seriously though, I wonder if this fits into the equation anymore at all? It WAS something they talked about back in the day, and I have seen demonstrations lof lasers that can be set up to only cut into a target block to a specific depth, but I'd be interested to see if they can tweak that when just shooting at a moving target, as opposed to those big blocks of plastic they were using on the show I saw.
 
2012-10-24 12:35:59 AM  
No word where the bayonets will be mounted

They should combine them with the horses... They would be a kind of bad-ass unicorn. We could storm the beaches of Normandy with Bayoneticorns.
 
2012-10-24 12:38:51 AM  
Hey Mr Admiral Dude - It's phasers, not lasers, ya big dummy.
 
2012-10-24 12:39:37 AM  
Isn't there a problem with humidity at sea level?

And the issue with shooting lasers into space isn't really an issue, lasers are not infinitely columnated.They'll always diffuse over distance.
 
2012-10-24 12:47:15 AM  
I was hoping it was photon torpedoes. At least they have on-board guidance making them useful beyond the horizon.
 
2012-10-24 12:51:21 AM  

wildcardjack: Isn't there a problem with humidity at sea level?

And the issue with shooting lasers into space isn't really an issue, lasers are not infinitely columnated.They'll always diffuse over distance.


I dont' see this as a main armament for ships, and my reading supports the suggestion that it's actually meant for "Point Defense" operations, against small close-range targets such as small boats, anti-ship missiles, and potentially fighter-craft.

If we're to see a 'scifi' weaponry system, it would be railguns for shipkilling weaponry, but I don't see fighters being taken out of the equation anytime soon, leaving most of our navy in an antipiracy role, or defending the mobile airstrip aircraft carriers.

Shore Bombardment and long range fire support would be possible with a railgun (maybe), but I think that role may be phased out as both air doctrine/technology evolves, and we start to actually get out of the Dreadnought/Battleship Doctrine era, and redesign our navy around modern technology and actual needs.

Now if you excuse me, I need to laugh hysterically at the idea that our government and military will actually reform itself.
 
2012-10-24 12:52:16 AM  

BolloxReader: I was hoping it was photon torpedoes. At least they have on-board guidance making them useful beyond the horizon.


We call those "Cruise Missiles" and "Armed Drones" :v
 
2012-10-24 12:55:24 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: It's actually art students with boards.

Nah, its military space lasers.


Yeah - when my crop suddenly has an elaborate design etched into it overnight, my first suspect is art students with boards, because they're extremely motivated, quiet as mice, highly secretive and well-organized all over the world.
 
2012-10-24 01:00:52 AM  
www.deviantart.com

thekidsandthecity.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-10-24 01:08:52 AM  
Two years? If you hire a bunch of scientists to start you can get laser pistols in a couple weeks Max.
 
2012-10-24 01:18:34 AM  

Klom Dark: Hey Mr Admiral Dude - It's phasers, not lasers, ya big dummy.


Odds are he still believes in hokey religions
 
2012-10-24 01:27:24 AM  
images.outdoorpros.com
 
2012-10-24 01:28:50 AM  

shotglasss: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

Less than 24 hours and this one's already tired to death. I guess Obammster finally got that zinger in he so desperately wanted. Too bad Ambassador Stevens wasn't around to enjoy it.


If they'd given him a bayonet, he might be.
 
2012-10-24 01:30:56 AM  

Thanks for the Meme-ries: Welcome to 30 years ago.....

[i291.photobucket.com image 300x395]

IT'S STAR WARS DAMMIT

/we start bombing in 5 minutes


Guess who is having the last laugh?
 
2012-10-24 01:32:54 AM  

Mikey1969: shotglasss: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

Less than 24 hours and this one's already tired to death. I guess Obammster finally got that zinger in he so desperately wanted. Too bad Ambassador Stevens wasn't around to enjoy it.

Wow, it really hurt your feelings to see Romney talked to like the adolescent he is, didn't it? I've never seen Obama's 'Parent Face' before, you know the one where you are explaining to your teenager that he can't spend the night at his girlfriend's house even though her mother thinks it's OK? Yeah, he had the 'I can't believe that I had to explain THIS to an adult.' look.


More to the point, that little display may have cost him the election (I know, I know, I'm trollin')
 
2012-10-24 01:35:39 AM  

Mikey1969: justtray: My stats teacher in college had worked on laser weapons for some defense contractor. He said they were mostly used to take down missiles and such. I asked specifically about weaponized lasers. That was almost 10 years ago.

That's all I've heard about, too. Ones for frying the guidance system on a missile, but not offensive ones. I'm really curious how you responsibly account for a light weapon that pretty much goes on forever... At least a bullet falls to earth, and a missile runs out of fuel if it misses. Admiral Jackapenny fires his ship based laser and misses, and we might set of an interstellar war... :-0

Seriously though, I wonder if this fits into the equation anymore at all? It WAS something they talked about back in the day, and I have seen demonstrations lof lasers that can be set up to only cut into a target block to a specific depth, but I'd be interested to see if they can tweak that when just shooting at a moving target, as opposed to those big blocks of plastic they were using on the show I saw.


You DO know, don't you, that laser light spreads over distance? By the time it got even to the nearest star (4 something LY) is would just be a red light. Unless it was absorbed by intersteller dust along the way...
 
2012-10-24 01:38:32 AM  

Mikey1969: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

They should combine them with the horses... They would be a kind of bad-ass unicorn. We could storm the beaches of Normandy with Bayoneticorns.


Didn't they use horses in the invasion of Afghanistan?
 
2012-10-24 01:51:06 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Mikey1969: justtray: My stats teacher in college had worked on laser weapons for some defense contractor. He said they were mostly used to take down missiles and such. I asked specifically about weaponized lasers. That was almost 10 years ago.

That's all I've heard about, too. Ones for frying the guidance system on a missile, but not offensive ones. I'm really curious how you responsibly account for a light weapon that pretty much goes on forever... At least a bullet falls to earth, and a missile runs out of fuel if it misses. Admiral Jackapenny fires his ship based laser and misses, and we might set of an interstellar war... :-0

Seriously though, I wonder if this fits into the equation anymore at all? It WAS something they talked about back in the day, and I have seen demonstrations lof lasers that can be set up to only cut into a target block to a specific depth, but I'd be interested to see if they can tweak that when just shooting at a moving target, as opposed to those big blocks of plastic they were using on the show I saw.

You DO know, don't you, that laser light spreads over distance? By the time it got even to the nearest star (4 something LY) is would just be a red light. Unless it was absorbed by intersteller dust along the way...


Well, the whole 'interstellar war' thing was a joke, but if that's your takeaway from my post, I don't know what else to say.
 
2012-10-24 01:56:25 AM  

Triumph: Yeah - when my crop suddenly has an elaborate design etched into it overnight, my first suspect is art students with boards, because they're extremely motivated, quiet as mice, highly secretive and well-organized all over the world.


Umm, depends on the crop. I know one where those kids would be very quiet at stealing.. err, putting an eleborate design in ..
 
2012-10-24 01:58:30 AM  

shotglasss: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

Less than 24 hours and this one's already tired to death. I guess Obammster finally got that zinger in he so desperately wanted. Too bad Ambassador Stevens wasn't around to enjoy it.


The best way to prevent the butthurt you are suffering is to generously lube up the bayonet before inserting it
 
2012-10-24 01:58:35 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Didn't they use horses in the invasion of Afghanistan?


The Marines are using mules to carry stuff Its an la times blog entry from 2009
 
2012-10-24 02:16:52 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: More to the point, that little display may have cost won him the election (I know, I know, I'm trollin')


My turn to troll :D
 
2012-10-24 02:18:35 AM  

Mikey1969: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Mikey1969: justtray: My stats teacher in college had worked on laser weapons for some defense contractor. He said they were mostly used to take down missiles and such. I asked specifically about weaponized lasers. That was almost 10 years ago.

That's all I've heard about, too. Ones for frying the guidance system on a missile, but not offensive ones. I'm really curious how you responsibly account for a light weapon that pretty much goes on forever... At least a bullet falls to earth, and a missile runs out of fuel if it misses. Admiral Jackapenny fires his ship based laser and misses, and we might set of an interstellar war... :-0

Seriously though, I wonder if this fits into the equation anymore at all? It WAS something they talked about back in the day, and I have seen demonstrations lof lasers that can be set up to only cut into a target block to a specific depth, but I'd be interested to see if they can tweak that when just shooting at a moving target, as opposed to those big blocks of plastic they were using on the show I saw.

You DO know, don't you, that laser light spreads over distance? By the time it got even to the nearest star (4 something LY) is would just be a red light. Unless it was absorbed by intersteller dust along the way...

Well, the whole 'interstellar war' thing was a joke, but if that's your takeaway from my post, I don't know what else to say.


Relevant to your conversation

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt1540125/quotes?qt=qt1142747
 
2012-10-24 02:57:58 AM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-24 02:58:50 AM  
www.theterrordrome.com
 
2012-10-24 03:02:09 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Mikey1969: shotglasss: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

Less than 24 hours and this one's already tired to death. I guess Obammster finally got that zinger in he so desperately wanted. Too bad Ambassador Stevens wasn't around to enjoy it.

Wow, it really hurt your feelings to see Romney talked to like the adolescent he is, didn't it? I've never seen Obama's 'Parent Face' before, you know the one where you are explaining to your teenager that he can't spend the night at his girlfriend's house even though her mother thinks it's OK? Yeah, he had the 'I can't believe that I had to explain THIS to an adult.' look.

More to the point, that little display may have cost him the election (I know, I know, I'm trollin')


The 1980s called, it wants its trolls back.
 
2012-10-24 03:02:15 AM  

Summercat: BolloxReader: I was hoping it was photon torpedoes. At least they have on-board guidance making them useful beyond the horizon.

We call those "Cruise Missiles" and "Armed Drones" :v


But...but... big badda boom. Like a mountain worth. With swirly effects. And anti-matter. And warp capabilities.

Damned admirals. You'd think they'd know their Enterprise weapon systems better than this. "Hey we have a laser. Just like Star Trek. Or Star Wars. Or something. Anyway, it's a beam of light that can knock a missile off course." Drones are the anti-missile weapon system. Idiots. All the photon stuff is offensive weapons.
 
2012-10-24 03:14:13 AM  

Summercat: I dont' see this as a main armament for ships, and my reading supports the suggestion that it's actually meant for "Point Defense" operations, against small close-range targets such as small boats, anti-ship missiles, and potentially fighter-craft.


Yes looks like it's a replacement for Phalanx
 
2012-10-24 03:41:24 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Yeah... Just as soon as they field the rail gun, right?

I know they are doing some cool stuff, but 2 years? That doesn't seem very realistic. The sea trials and stuff would take that long and that's after they finally build it.


It`s almost as though what we read in the news is some form of altered reality so that the people the weapon is to be used on don`t get advanced warning of every little military advancement that is made.

Most stuff is out of service by the time it is reported in the papers...

cretinbob: Summercat: I dont' see this as a main armament for ships, and my reading supports the suggestion that it's actually meant for "Point Defense" operations, against small close-range targets such as small boats, anti-ship missiles, and potentially fighter-craft.

Yes looks like it's a replacement for Phalanx


I read this as "Yes looks like it's a replacement for Phallus"
 
2012-10-24 03:48:31 AM  
Naturally, but of course. I assume they will be 3D printed and very useful against the 3rd world goat herders that will fire back with 10$ copies of 60 year old Russian guns.
 
2012-10-24 04:02:40 AM  
Even better, the Chinse Navy sailors all wear red shirts. They're gonna go down easy.

/But seriously, can we have our Star Trek flip phones and video conferencing first?
 
2012-10-24 04:05:10 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Didn't they use horses in the invasion of Afghanistan?


Yes. But today we have far fewer than we did in WWI. The same with bayonets.
 
2012-10-24 04:50:43 AM  

cretinbob: Summercat: I dont' see this as a main armament for ships, and my reading supports the suggestion that it's actually meant for "Point Defense" operations, against small close-range targets such as small boats, anti-ship missiles, and potentially fighter-craft.

Yes looks like it's a replacement for Phalanx


Some of the proposals, like the LaWS, actually use the Radar tacking system and fire control modules from the MK15 to target and fire the lasers too. See here or here.
 
2012-10-24 05:12:43 AM  
The big problem is making the florescent lights dim for effect when the laser goes off without disturbing all the computer equipment.  That, and deciding on the way cool sound that should accompany the effect.
 
2012-10-24 05:34:33 AM  

0Icky0: /But seriously, can we have our Star Trek flip phones


I have been wanting a gold and black flip phone for years. How hard can it be? You'd think some company would try it, even in limited numbers. Ah, just looking it up, it seems Nokia made some. 14 of them. Those bastards.
 
2012-10-24 06:08:09 AM  
Plasma weapons are vastly superior anyway. You always skip laser tech.
 
2012-10-24 06:21:49 AM  

justtray: Plasma weapons are vastly superior anyway. You always skip laser tech.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-24 06:26:59 AM  
Private: "Sir out laser weapons are useless!"

Captain: "What is it private? Some new form of new shield technology?"

Private: "A light drizzle sir."
 
2012-10-24 06:30:58 AM  

justtray: Plasma weapons are vastly superior anyway. You always skip laser tech.


I donno, the lasers never run out and I can keep them on full auto without having to shoot down so many alien ships to keep up the ammo supply... sure they dont have the same punch, but i can keep the fire on.

//xcom
 
2012-10-24 06:35:56 AM  
itsthequestionthatdrivesus.files.wordpress.com

Pew pew!
 
2012-10-24 06:43:42 AM  
i1054.photobucket.com

I know that that all peace time navies tend to go insane after a while but even by the standards of horrifically wasteful US navy these ships are dumb as fark. A 15,000 ton "destroyer" at 3.3 billion per hull (which means they will end costing 5 billion each) with a total class size of maybe 7 but probably 3 or 4 would make It biggest white elephant warship since the Yamoto. Big ships like this have been obsolete since the advent of microprocessor and they ain't getting any less obsolete as long range navel missiles continue to get faster, cheaper and more accurate. I mean for farks stake you can buy a Brahmos missile from the Russians for $800,000 a pop and the speed it is traveling during its attack phase makes it is almost impossible to intercept by anything other than block 3 RAM.

\USS Pegasus come back to us, all is forgiven.

\\ I also appreciate the irony of naming a huge Destroyer-Cruiser after a man who did all his best work with a littoral brown water force.
 
2012-10-24 07:21:46 AM  

Triumph: Yeah - when my crop suddenly has an elaborate design etched into it overnight, my first suspect is art students with boards, because they're extremely motivated, quiet as mice, highly secretive and well-organized all over the world.


Of course, we have actual concrete evidence that at least a portion of crop circles are created by art students with boards. That tells us that art students with boards are a sufficient explanation for the existence of a crop circle. Since they're far more common and easy to spot than, say, military laser satellites or aliens, it's a preferable explanation.
 
2012-10-24 07:24:50 AM  
Fact is the Navy just doesn't like littorals and it needs them now more than ever.
So far as the bayonets and horses quip, it made for fine entertainment. But once you move past that, it only shows that politicians don't understand military needs. Romney wants more boats, but he doesn't know what for. Obama wants fewer boats, and he's being told to buy the most useless kind by his advisers.

Technology has advanced but some things just haven't changed much in the last half century. You still need horses to reach difficult areas, and you still need knives as a last resort. You will always need a few guys on the water to carry out interdiction and security jobs.
Yes the military is evolving, but its evolving into something that's not very useful against the threats we know of... and in a rush to prove the emperor isn't naked, people are pretending the return of the battleship is a wise move.

I'm not against military spending or buying new tech, but cover the battlefield needs first.
Right now the soldiers could use pay raises and more appropriate equipment.
 
2012-10-24 08:05:44 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Mikey1969: justtray: My stats teacher in college had worked on laser weapons for some defense contractor. He said they were mostly used to take down missiles and such. I asked specifically about weaponized lasers. That was almost 10 years ago.

That's all I've heard about, too. Ones for frying the guidance system on a missile, but not offensive ones. I'm really curious how you responsibly account for a light weapon that pretty much goes on forever... At least a bullet falls to earth, and a missile runs out of fuel if it misses. Admiral Jackapenny fires his ship based laser and misses, and we might set of an interstellar war... :-0

Seriously though, I wonder if this fits into the equation anymore at all? It WAS something they talked about back in the day, and I have seen demonstrations lof lasers that can be set up to only cut into a target block to a specific depth, but I'd be interested to see if they can tweak that when just shooting at a moving target, as opposed to those big blocks of plastic they were using on the show I saw.

You DO know, don't you, that laser light spreads over distance? By the time it got even to the nearest star (4 something LY) is would just be a red light. Unless it was absorbed by intersteller dust along the way...



Not to mention cutting through the atmosphere...
 
2012-10-24 08:11:09 AM  
i.imgur.com

Can't we just buy some from XCom? They need the money.
 
2012-10-24 08:12:04 AM  
Rear Admiral 'well good at his jerb' Klunder:"We're well past physics," he said. "We're just going through the integration efforts... Hopefully that tells you we're well mature, and we're ready to put these on naval ships."

Oh, well, then...

Seriously... who the fark talks like that past the age of 15?
 
2012-10-24 08:16:48 AM  
They wont risk using laseguns as long as we keep our shields up. No one wants to go out in a sub fusion explosion.
 
2012-10-24 08:19:21 AM  
Why would you want to mount a laser on a ship? Wouldn't you want to mount land in the US with some mirror mounted on satellites that can be positioned and aimed?

Why would you advertise this capability? You could wipe out an air force or a uranium enrichment facility and no one would know what hit them.
 
2012-10-24 08:20:17 AM  
3.bp.blogspot.com 

Lasers?!
 
2012-10-24 08:22:53 AM  
BINDERS FULL OF LASERS
 
2012-10-24 08:23:22 AM  

Honest Bender: They wont risk using laseguns as long as we keep our shields up. No one wants to go out in a sub fusion explosion.


What about suicide bombers? Any one of those nutjobs could cause a kiloton magnitude explosion with a personal shield and a laspistol, or just a civilian cutterray.
 
2012-10-24 08:28:45 AM  

way south: Fact is the Navy just doesn't like clittorals ...


Is that what they're calling women now?

/sorry
 
2012-10-24 08:36:17 AM  

justtray: Plasma weapons are vastly superior anyway. You always skip laser tech.


Nah, you make loads of laser pistols and sell them to fund the base. Or not if you are playing the latest game.
 
2012-10-24 08:45:56 AM  

gas giant: "Top admirals" are usually old farts that will believe any and all bullsh*t weapons contractors are trying to sell them.


I was wondering if the top admiral bunks with the rear admiral.
 
2012-10-24 08:56:01 AM  
Just watch them around the Holtzman shields.
 
2012-10-24 09:02:21 AM  
It will be a lightsaber bayonet.
 
2012-10-24 09:02:52 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Then again. We probably need more horses and bayonets


God knows we need more naval power
www.globalsecurity.org
 
2012-10-24 09:05:56 AM  

Revek: Are they breech loaders or muzzle loaders?


And what, exactly, does a laser bayonet look like?
 
2012-10-24 09:10:40 AM  

way south: Fact is the Navy just doesn't like littorals and it needs them now more than ever.


www.ccs.neu.edu

"Huh huh huh..... littorals......"

/That word never fails to make the 12 year old in me giggle
 
2012-10-24 09:16:51 AM  

SpectroBoy: Revek: Are they breech loaders or muzzle loaders?

And what, exactly, does a laser bayonet look like?


farm6.staticflickr.com
 
2012-10-24 09:27:03 AM  
The Air Force project was a chemical laser and has been scrapped. The Navy has tested solid-state lasers in the 15 kW range and has ganged four of them together. They can use the same targeting and guidance systems that Phalanx uses and only need power, no munitions storage, handling, etc, so deployment can be much more rapid than for most weapons.
 
2012-10-24 09:33:29 AM  
Oh and just for even more perspective. Allies/friendlies highlighted in blue.....


i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-24 09:37:54 AM  

crab66: Oh and just for even more perspective. Allies/friendlies highlighted in blue.....


[i.imgur.com image 850x1076]


Yeah, allies TODAY...
We need to prepare for the future wars.
 
2012-10-24 09:40:24 AM  

SVenus: Yeah, allies TODAY...
We need to prepare for the future wars.


Our aircraft carriers will blot out the sun?
 
2012-10-24 09:43:22 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Tr0mBoNe: I'm sure though that it would have no effect against a steel hull or a really fast moving target so it will only be used in conjunction with preexisting CIWS.

Then it seems like a giant waste of money if they are going to keep Phalanx. I support them bringing the project to technical completion so we can learn more, but if it's just going to complement the current system that works quite well, what's the point?


Proof of concept, perhaps?

If it doesn't work, it'll just go the way of anti-mine dolphins, train-mounted artillery and other military technology that were only built because some generals assumed would work, simply because they sounded cool.

But if it does work, eventually (10, 15, 20 years? I dunno) a version of the tech small enough to be operated by a single infantryman will be made (perhaps small enough that the soldier can fix bayonet while on horseback). We'd have laser rifles replacing the M16/M4 platform and crew-served laser guns complimenting or replacing the M2 and Mk-19 platforms and anybody foolish enough to try to attack the best-trained military in the history of the world will be quickly EX-TER-MIN-A-TED!
 
2012-10-24 09:46:02 AM  

Farker Soze: Two years? If you hire a bunch of scientists to start you can get laser pistols in a couple weeks Max.


Or get some boing-boing/kickstarter-steampunk-arduino-maker chick to do it for the AW publicity for free.
 
2012-10-24 09:53:37 AM  
Well Subby, they obviously go on the bears.

images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-10-24 10:00:49 AM  

crab66: SVenus: Yeah, allies TODAY...
We need to prepare for the future wars.

Our aircraft carriers will blot out the sun?


Yep.

media.comicvine.com
 
2012-10-24 10:04:46 AM  
blog.fantasyheartbreaker.com

Pew pew...pew pew pew
 
2012-10-24 10:26:06 AM  

DjangoStonereaver: way south: Fact is the Navy just doesn't like littorals and it needs them now more than ever.

[www.ccs.neu.edu image 315x240]

"Huh huh huh..... littorals......"

/That word never fails to make the 12 year old in me giggle


That's okay - I still giggle when I hear the targeteers talking about "mensurated" coordinates.
 
2012-10-24 10:33:51 AM  

Yotto: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: More to the point, that little display may have cost won him the election (I know, I know, I'm trollin')

My turn to troll :D


Ah, yes. Def: TROLL - anyone who disagrees with me, cause he obviously can't be serious about what he is saying, and therefore is simply saying it to get attention.

That about it, Poindexter?
 
2012-10-24 10:42:50 AM  
Jokes about accidentally starting intergalactic war aside, the range of laser weapons *can* be a problem.

Like any other weapon we've had before, practice firings will far outnumber firings in battle. And ship Captains get *really* nervous about accidentally hitting friendly/neutral targets during practice firings.

With something like a CIWS or a NATO Sea Sparrow Missile, the TAO can tell the Captain "If we make sure we're clear X miles in front of the ship, Y miles behind the ship and Z miles to the side, as well as W thousand feet above us, I can promise you that we won't hit anything by accident - the projectiles literally cannot go further than those ranges."

But what do you do with a high-powered laser that might still have damaging effects a hundred miles out (or more)? The strategy of "little laser/big ocean" or "little laser/big sky" will only work for so long - sooner or later you're going to hit something you didn't mean to.
 
2012-10-24 10:42:53 AM  

Mikey1969: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

They should combine them with the horses... They would be a kind of bad-ass unicorn. We could storm the beaches of Normandy with Bayoneticorns.


Nah, the Red Bull would shove them right back in the sea.
 
2012-10-24 10:44:05 AM  

fusillade762: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Mikey1969: shotglasss: No word where the bayonets will be mounted

Less than 24 hours and this one's already tired to death. I guess Obammster finally got that zinger in he so desperately wanted. Too bad Ambassador Stevens wasn't around to enjoy it.

Wow, it really hurt your feelings to see Romney talked to like the adolescent he is, didn't it? I've never seen Obama's 'Parent Face' before, you know the one where you are explaining to your teenager that he can't spend the night at his girlfriend's house even though her mother thinks it's OK? Yeah, he had the 'I can't believe that I had to explain THIS to an adult.' look.

More to the point, that little display may have cost him the election (I know, I know, I'm trollin')

The 1980s called, it wants its trolls back.


Ah, yes.

First, Def: TROLL - anyone who disagrees with me, cause he obviously can't be serious about what he is saying, and therefore is simply saying it to get attention.

Second, as an old Navy guy, I understand the need for more ships, particularly nuke carriers. Psychologically, a carrier off your coast projects force much better than something launched from 10,000 miles away.

And since carriers are, of course, sitting ducks without deep-ringed protection, we need that to protect them.
 
2012-10-24 10:52:41 AM  

0Icky0: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Didn't they use horses in the invasion of Afghanistan?

Yes. But today we have far fewer than we did in WWI. The same with bayonets.


The whole horses and bayonets thing was a straw man. Exceptionally UN-presidential. And a large segment of the audience saw it in exactly that way.

Someone here said that Obama and Romney came across as a stern parent and spoiled teenager. It was actually more of petulant and defensively sarcastic incumbent and Presidential-looking/sounding challenger.

I watched this debate on a big screen TV in the Common Room of a city community center. There were about 80 people there, about equally divided AFAICT between Obama and Romney supporters. A couple (1-3) on each side were obviously fanatics, the rest much more low key and thoughtful.

That one zinger hurt Obama.
 
2012-10-24 11:53:39 AM  
I'mma get my popcorn.

t3.gstatic.com
 
2012-10-24 11:53:45 AM  

Farker Soze: Two years? If you hire a bunch of scientists to start you can get laser pistols in a couple weeks Max.


You'll need a lot of weapons fragments for that.
 
2012-10-24 12:37:26 PM  

way south: Well these lasers are for warships, subby. So you should be asking if they still reinforce the prow like they did on old roman barges.

/The thought of an aircraft carrier Commander shouting "RAMMING SPEED!" does sound awesome...


To be fair, getting rammed by a carrier would surely do a lot of damage. No matter how well you've studied "How to Avoid Huge Ships".
 
2012-10-24 12:41:50 PM  

Cyno01: Mentat: We had better build more ships because the ocean isn't getting any smaller and China is investing heavily in lasers and anti-lasers.

Mirrors?


Mirrors aren't 100% reflective; hit one with a big enough laser and it absorbs enough energy to turn into charcoal.
 
2012-10-24 12:43:39 PM  

way south: Fact is the Navy just doesn't like littorals and it needs them now more than ever.
So far as the bayonets and horses quip, it made for fine entertainment. But once you move past that, it only shows that politicians don't understand military needs. Romney wants more boats, but he doesn't know what for. Obama wants fewer boats, and he's being told to buy the most useless kind by his advisers.

Technology has advanced but some things just haven't changed much in the last half century. You still need horses to reach difficult areas, and you still need knives as a last resort. You will always need a few guys on the water to carry out interdiction and security jobs.
Yes the military is evolving, but its evolving into something that's not very useful against the threats we know of... and in a rush to prove the emperor isn't naked, people are pretending the return of the battleship is a wise move.

I'm not against military spending or buying new tech, but cover the battlefield needs first.
Right now the soldiers could use pay raises and more appropriate equipment.


Don't know if anyone thanked you, but that helped to explain some of the military expenditures and that to me. Genuinely appreciative.
 
2012-10-24 02:02:54 PM  
Thats no moon
 
2012-10-24 04:04:15 PM  
Barack and Mitt: The War for the U.S. Navy Has Just Begun

"Capabilities matter. One modern U.S. destroyer, armed with "smart" missiles and sensors, arguably outclasses the anti-surface striking power of a World War II U.S. carrier and its escorts -- until the Lone Ranger super-ship all-too-quickly expends its pricey missiles. The destroyer's empty magazine moment is the trenchant instant we realize that former Bush and Obama Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had a point when he said (paraphrasing Josef Stalin), "Mass of numbers has a quality all of its own."

"Former British First Sea Lord Adm. Sir Jonathon Band understands the linkage: 95 percent of global trade passes through nine vulnerable maritime chokepoints. Jeremy Blackham and Gwyn Prins, in a 2010 issue of the Royal United Services Institute Journal, also credit Sir Jonathan with calling the sea the other "superhighway of the modern age."

"The 21st century's best-known "superhighway" is the Internet. Blackham and Prins note that the two superhighways confront maritime bottlenecks. "Ninety percent of global email traffic is conveyed via undersea fiber-optic cables. These cables bunch in several critical sea areas (off New York ... the English Channel, the South China Sea ... and off the west coast of Japan)."

"So everyone (not just Americans) who uses the Internet, and everyone (not just Americans) whose economy benefits from international trade, has an interest in securing maritime chokepoints."

It takes 10 years to build a new fleet. We agree no one trusts Iran at Hormuz. So, candidates, is it in America's interest to have a Navy that can patrol these distant chokepoints? To project power to defend these chokepoints? To project offensive power to open these chokepoints if a hostile force applies a chokehold?

Each of these missions requires more ships and more capabilities. Which means spending more money in an era when debt itself is a strategic threat. But if a critical maritime chokepoint closes, the economy takes a broadside. Barack, Mitt: Your foreign policy and economic revival debate, and the U.S. Navy's fundamental role in both, has now begun, in earnest."
 
2012-10-24 05:45:12 PM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Yotto: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: More to the point, that little display may have cost won him the election (I know, I know, I'm trollin')

My turn to troll :D

Ah, yes. Def: TROLL - anyone who disagrees with me, cause he obviously can't be serious about what he is saying, and therefore is simply saying it to get attention.

That about it, Poindexter?


Sweet. I totally succeeded.

FTR I'm not actually a very good troll and I'm surprised that worked.
FT(further)R I'm going to be voting for Obama even though I don't think he's the best guy evar.
 
2012-10-24 07:31:31 PM  
media.giantbomb.com
nods approvingly
 
2012-10-24 11:22:46 PM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: The whole horses and bayonets thing was a straw man. Exceptionally UN-presidential. And a large segment of the audience saw it in exactly that way.


What was un-Presidential was Romney's assertion that numbers from WWI have any relevance today. He sounded like he was giving a grade school book report.
 
2012-10-25 12:18:35 AM  

Yotto: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Yotto: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: More to the point, that little display may have cost won him the election (I know, I know, I'm trollin')

My turn to troll :D

Ah, yes. Def: TROLL - anyone who disagrees with me, cause he obviously can't be serious about what he is saying, and therefore is simply saying it to get attention.

That about it, Poindexter?

Sweet. I totally succeeded.

FTR I'm not actually a very good troll and I'm surprised that worked.
FT(further)R I'm going to be voting for Obama even though I don't think he's the best guy evar.


As am I.
 
2012-10-25 03:54:57 AM  

alienated: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Didn't they use horses in the invasion of Afghanistan?

The Marines are using mules to carry stuff Its an la times blog entry from 2009


Think they still train with mules to do that currently.
 
2012-10-25 04:09:42 AM  

way south: Fact is the Navy just doesn't like littorals and it needs them now more than ever.
So far as the bayonets and horses quip, it made for fine entertainment. But once you move past that, it only shows that politicians don't understand military needs. Romney wants more boats, but he doesn't know what for. Obama wants fewer boats, and he's being told to buy the most useless kind by his advisers.

Technology has advanced but some things just haven't changed much in the last half century. You still need horses to reach difficult areas, and you still need knives as a last resort. You will always need a few guys on the water to carry out interdiction and security jobs.
Yes the military is evolving, but its evolving into something that's not very useful against the threats we know of... and in a rush to prove the emperor isn't naked, people are pretending the return of the battleship is a wise move.

I'm not against military spending or buying new tech, but cover the battlefield needs first.
Right now the soldiers could use pay raises and more appropriate equipment.


Isn't it congress that decides ship funding though?
 
2012-10-25 04:41:25 AM  

Medic Zero: way south: Fact is the Navy just doesn't like littorals and it needs them now more than ever.
So far as the bayonets and horses quip, it made for fine entertainment. But once you move past that, it only shows that politicians don't understand military needs. Romney wants more boats, but he doesn't know what for. Obama wants fewer boats, and he's being told to buy the most useless kind by his advisers.

Technology has advanced but some things just haven't changed much in the last half century. You still need horses to reach difficult areas, and you still need knives as a last resort. You will always need a few guys on the water to carry out interdiction and security jobs.
Yes the military is evolving, but its evolving into something that's not very useful against the threats we know of... and in a rush to prove the emperor isn't naked, people are pretending the return of the battleship is a wise move.

I'm not against military spending or buying new tech, but cover the battlefield needs first.
Right now the soldiers could use pay raises and more appropriate equipment.

Isn't it congress that decides ship funding though?


Congress does indeed decide funding. That's part of the problem since funding a project usually means jobs in someones area. The conflict of interest between keeping their constiuents employed at these government funded jobs and safe by having an effective military generally means that in order to achieve the later, they pad the former. Sure that Fighter might be practically useless for our current and predicted future states, but by God we'll have 200 of them because that'll cover the gap!

Also, way south is (to pardon the pun) way south on his estimation of the candidates positions. Romney is just ignorant. Obama is just following the advice of the Joint Chiefs and other heads of respective service branches. By infering that they are just "advisors" and giving the wrong advise, he's basically saying that the military doesn't understand what they need. That's garbage.

Still, the real problem is that the legislative branch controls the funds. So they spend the money as they see fit, regardless of the actual needs of the military.
 
2012-10-25 05:29:56 AM  
Lasers? How quaint. Beam a photon torpedo onto their bridge.
 
2012-10-25 06:51:31 AM  

TwistedFark: By infering that they are just "advisors" and giving the wrong advise, he's basically saying that the military doesn't understand what they need. That's garbage.


This is what we are fighting.

dl.dropbox.com

This is what the military thinks they need.

dl.dropbox.com

...and they want it with lasers.

dl.dropbox.com

You be the judge on whether they are meeting the current threat with the proper tool.

I realize you're only defending the Iron triangle to defend Obama, but ...really?
I've been a long time proponent for having a large military and even this thing seems wasteful.

/Meanwhile the men need new armor, better rifles, and more benefits.
/The same group of deciders struggled on whether it could drop $30 mil for the XM-25.
/On one hand, a weapon that changes how gun battles are fought. On the other, a ship we probably wont use that costs a hundred times as much.
 
2012-10-25 05:37:50 PM  

way south: TwistedFark: By infering that they are just "advisors" and giving the wrong advise, he's basically saying that the military doesn't understand what they need. That's garbage.

This is what we are fighting.

[dl.dropbox.com image 500x307]

This is what the military thinks they need.

[dl.dropbox.com image 825x565]

...and they want it with lasers.

[dl.dropbox.com image 650x326]

You be the judge on whether they are meeting the current threat with the proper tool.

I realize you're only defending the Iron triangle to defend Obama, but ...really?
I've been a long time proponent for having a large military and even this thing seems wasteful.

/Meanwhile the men need new armor, better rifles, and more benefits.
/The same group of deciders struggled on whether it could drop $30 mil for the XM-25.
/On one hand, a weapon that changes how gun battles are fought. On the other, a ship we probably wont use that costs a hundred times as much.


You're cherry picking an argument.The military is in our country quite wide and vast. There are actually reported cases in the news media of the military asking for equipment like more UAV's to fight the war in Afghanistan and being denied, but given instead more funding for superiority fighters that they claim we don't need.

If you want to item by item say that all military expenditures should be going to fight terrorists, then that's a pretty foolish position.
 
Displayed 128 of 128 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report