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.

(Fox News)   The US Navy has developed a real, honest-to-God laser gun, mounted it on a ship, and is about to begin live-testing it with the Fifth Fleet. Next step: sharks   (foxnews.com) divider line 225
    More: Cool, Fifth Fleet, U.S. Navy, laser guns, psychological testing, Buck Rogers, airborne lasers  
•       •       •

14736 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Apr 2013 at 6:09 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-09 03:09:04 AM

Caluth: What I wanna know is what kind of sound does it make when it fires.  Is it just silent? Would have to pay an additional million to get fun sound effects on trigger pull?


I heard from Top men that it plays la cucaracha. It's pretty bad ass.

\Top Men.
 
2013-04-09 03:09:23 AM

lordargent: It's supposed to burn through metal at a distance, I don't think a little bit of mist is going to stop it.


Mist scatters light.  If the laser beam is scattered then it loses intensity.  If a laser beam doesn't have enough intensity then it doesn't burn through metal at a distance.
 
drp
2013-04-09 03:13:33 AM
But I thought lasers could't even penetrate navigation shields.
 
2013-04-09 03:15:39 AM

Caluth: What I wanna know is what kind of sound does it make when it fires.  Is it just silent? Would have to pay an additional million to get fun sound effects on trigger pull?


cdn.instructables.com
This plus a cardboard tube equals a blaster shot. So, I HOPE it don't cost a million bucks.
 
2013-04-09 03:53:43 AM

OgreMagi: I've been out of the laser business a very long time and that was not something we had, as far as I know. I did that in the 80's when artificial ruby rod lasers were cutting edge.


1.bp.blogspot.com

Don't tell Ruby Rod he's not cutting edge any more unless you want a galactic hissy-fit.
 
2013-04-09 04:03:57 AM

Danger Avoid Death: OgreMagi: I've been out of the laser business a very long time and that was not something we had, as far as I know. I did that in the 80's when artificial ruby rod lasers were cutting edge.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 266x199]

Don't tell Ruby Rod he's not cutting edge any more unless you want a galactic hissy-fit.


Just calling him artificial would be bad enough.
 
2013-04-09 04:06:17 AM

Fano: This plus a cardboard tube equals a blaster shot. So, I HOPE it don't cost a million bucks.


What? In which franchise? Ben Burtt didn't use no stinking Slinky!
 
2013-04-09 04:07:43 AM
OgreMagi:

maxheck: OgreMagi:

Refractors (aka, laser mirrors) have to be tuned to the frequency of the laser. With something that powerful, the laser would probably melt the refractor rather quickly.

I feel very smart right now, because I read your post and thought... "something like this has to exist..."

Turns out I guessed right: Plasma mirrors. And I'm obviously not the first to guess they could be used for intense lasers.

/ I am so SMRT! :P

Very cool. I've been out of the laser business a very long time and that was not something we had, as far as I know. I did that in the 80's when artificial ruby rod lasers were cutting edge.


I'm a mere Fark Physicist who read a lot of Scientific American articles before it went pop-science, but my thinking was along the lines of "so how do you make a mirror that doesn't burn away, AND you can steer it a zillion times faster than a cannon turret?"

Plasma. You can do all sorts of optical effects with it, and with enough power you can shape it with nothing more than scaled-up television coils. The same sort of people who make ginormous lasers work at the same labs where people know this stuff, with a lot of overlap. I looked it up on Google, and ta-daah! It is an effect used with powerful lasers.

There's not a lot of information available on the phenomenon, I'm not so smart as to understand most of it and the publicly available info all seems to be all about in the very, VERY short jigga-watt laser pulse range so perhaps it can't deliver useful power, but then again, not everything is publicly available. I'd bet a cookie there are plasma mirrors involved in anything that could productively be used as a weapon.
 
2013-04-09 04:16:25 AM

IWood: Fano: This plus a cardboard tube equals a blaster shot. So, I HOPE it don't cost a million bucks.

What? In which franchise? Ben Burtt didn't use no stinking Slinky!




Here I link the most poncy Brit to overexplain how to do it... who thinks a slinky can really recreate it. /a>
 
2013-04-09 04:22:43 AM
Fano:

Wood: Fano: This plus a cardboard tube equals a blaster shot. So, I HOPE it don't cost a million bucks.

What? In which franchise? Ben Burtt didn't use no stinking Slinky!

Here I link the most poncy Brit to overexplain how to do it... who thinks a slinky can really recreate it


Could be worse. The sound of the Tardis taking off and landing was basically scraping the wires in a piano.

And no, I am not a featured partner.
 
2013-04-09 04:39:45 AM

maxheck: Fano:

Wood: Fano: This plus a cardboard tube equals a blaster shot. So, I HOPE it don't cost a million bucks.

What? In which franchise? Ben Burtt didn't use no stinking Slinky!

Here I link the most poncy Brit to overexplain how to do it... who thinks a slinky can really recreate it

Could be worse. The sound of the Tardis taking off and landing was basically scraping the wires in a piano.

And no, I am not a featured partner.


I see nothing wrong with linking Cracked as a source of proof. I miss the old days of watching "making of" documentaries that didn't involve "so, we used our extensive library of sounds" to do whichever. Seeing what Foley artists have to do to make things sound "natural" or "otherwordly" to me make me appreciate what I hear.
 
2013-04-09 06:00:16 AM
The LASER is ineffective going through smoke and rain and gloom of night.
 
2013-04-09 06:48:21 AM

mark12A: "It operates much like a blowtorch ... with an unlimited magazine," one official said.I'd like to meet this "official". I'm selling stock in my perpetual motion machine company.

He means that you're not limited to a discrete number of ammo rounds like you are with guns/missiles. As long as the ship has fuel, it can generate power for many laser shots until ship's fuel runs out.

We're working on electric ship technology that features multiple power generators scattered around the ship, electric propulsion, electric catapults, electric weapons, and switching technologies for routing power between propulsion and weapons as needed. I like working for the Navy. We do cool stuff.

/except Thursday.
//Spent Thursday curled up on a cargo pallet in the Helo hangar on the USS Ft. Worth with a nasty cold while the ship ripped along at 40 kts doing steep turns.
//got up only to do my test events


We should swap notes. My company is working on that ship's Total Ship Survivabilty Trials (TSST). We have a complete model of the ship with every component, cable, pipe, and bulkhead. And the crew. I mostly work on the crew.
 
2013-04-09 06:51:50 AM

Smoking GNU: fusillade762: Because People in power are Stupid: Might be a better missile defense than what is currently used on ships.

O RLY?

[media.defenceindustrydaily.com image 800x570]

I'd have to agree with you there. With lasers all you have to do is make the missile spin and distribute the energy from the laser evenly over the surface, which would significantly reduce the likelihood of it being shot down, whereas a bullet from that thing will dot he job, spinning missile or no.


Would a ballerina spinning deflect a shotgun blast? No. Same principle, energy is energy.

Besides, spinning most anti-ship missiles would really fark with their targeting systems. They use radar or an IR camera.
 
2013-04-09 06:59:13 AM

DreamSnipers: The dirty secret of lasers is the effect on personnel. At longer ranges these powerful lasers can permanently blind people. The horrors of war are to include a weapon that can cause wholesale blindness among soldiers and affected noncombatants.
I felt the article was avoiding this issue with this quote "of obliterating small boats and unmanned aerial vehicles."  Sooner or later, blinding is going to be a major issue with these weapons.


I'm not sure if it's DOD policy of international treaty, but when using Laser weapons you have to publish the frequency of light the laser will be operating at. This would allow all combatants to prepare protective eyewear ahead of time.
 
2013-04-09 07:15:11 AM

Evil Twin Skippy: Would a ballerina spinning deflect a shotgun blast?


i1162.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-09 07:26:10 AM

The WindowLicker: Smoking GNU: I'd have to agree with you there. With lasers all you have to do is make the missile spin and distribute the energy from the laser evenly over the surface, which would significantly reduce the likelihood of it being shot down, whereas a bullet from that thing will dot he job, spinning missile or no.

Spinning a missile to prevent high-power laser damage is like telling a ballerina to pirouette in front of a shotgun.  The energy is still going into the target, and at that level, it will be causing all kinds of fancy plasma ablation effects on the missile.


Finally got to your post. Lemme guess, Tom Clancy fan too?
 
2013-04-09 07:26:16 AM

Deep Contact: The LASER is ineffective going through smoke and rain and gloom of night.


Darkness foils lasers? Huh. Never would've thought...
 
2013-04-09 08:21:47 AM
How big are these laser systems anyway? I know missile defense is one of their proposed uses, but the distance factor is a problem. I was wondering how effective it might conceivably be to mount the laser on a drone, and have the drone get close to a missile and try to shoot it down. That would cut down on the power requirements and diffusion problem.
 
2013-04-09 08:22:19 AM

The Snow Dog: Deep Contact: The LASER is ineffective going through smoke and rain and gloom of night.

Darkness foils lasers? Huh. Never would've thought...


No, just the gloom.
 
2013-04-09 12:43:27 PM

The Snow Dog: Deep Contact: The LASER is ineffective going through smoke and rain and gloom of night.

Darkness foils lasers? Huh. Never would've thought...


The things you learn from fark experts...
 
2013-04-09 03:39:53 PM
maxheck:

Speaking of using sand as a kinetic-kill vehicle, you ever read the Legacy Trilogy by Ian Douglas?

At one point, humans strike back against an extraterrestrial foe by accelerating thousands of tons of martian sand to near-lightspeed and detonating the containers prior to arrival to the hostile world...

I thought it was neat.
 
2013-04-09 04:55:06 PM
 
2013-04-10 11:46:30 PM

Doubleodoug: But can it pop popcorn?


Will it blend?
 
2013-04-11 02:33:15 AM

another cultural observer: The laser gun and associated generators and machinery emit "comparatively safe" levels of radiation.  Nobody remembers the Ponce or its godforsaken crew, so when the glowing, crewless hulk is discovered in 6 months it can simply be scuttled with no one the wiser.


There's a significant and not exactly subtle difference between electromagnetic radiation and ionizing radiation you're not comprehending.
 
Displayed 25 of 225 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report