Advance Tactical Laser

[LancerMc]

Recently announced on Boeing's website, the Advance Tactical Laser project, has recieved a C-130H for the purpose of being fitted with a Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser (COIL).

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2006/q1/060123a_nr.html

This is a scaled down version of the Airborne Laser designed to hit stationary and mobile ground targets. The laser would be used to destroy, damage, or harass the enemy on the ground. The laser would be fitted to aircraft like USAF Special Forces C-130's and CV-22's. The laser would be completely self contained because of risk of chemical injury to the aircraft crew. The laser would be fire from a turret built into the bottom of the aircraft.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/atl.htm

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/techno...49769aa138b84010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

As much I personally support the idea of using high powered laser's for our military, I am worried the U.S. is spending to much money in a technology that so far hasn't really proved anything. The ABL project hasn't even had anything close to an combat simulated test, and the U.S. military is spending money on more laser projects. The THEL program between Israel and the U.S. Army has been successful in tests, but I don't really see the need for an expensive laser system that will be used to attack ground targets. It is describe to either destroy, damage, or harass ground targets. I just don't see the need to widen the development of a technology that mite only be able to damage or harass targets on the ground at this time. I say wait until the technology is more mature to further develop these mobile lasers systems.

I am open to hearing other views on this issue, especially from people that are more familiar with this technology then myself. Will the ATL design be an effective ground attack system? Is it worth the devleoping another airborne system while the other hasn't finished its tests.

 

[Rich]

The same thing was said about guns at one time. Even airplanes took almost 40 years to start reaching their potential. I remember being stationed in the southwest 26 years ago and finding old fighter planes strewn about the desert with laser holes in them.

Just imagine the psychological effect on an enemy when they see the unit to their right getting cooked by a laser, from an airplane they never even saw.:nutkick :nutkick

 

[turin]

Well, concerning the technology itself, it might be promising. Also I am advocating the actual procurement of systems employing energy-based weapons, since I am under the impression, that such steps might contribute to the further development and refinement of next-generation-systems.
However I am still sceptical concerning the ABL, since it really is a very costly and complex system, mostly because of the chemical laser employed.

The solid-state-lasers seem to be preferable in terms of system cost and construction, yet the power output is rather unsatisfying right now.

Of course regardless of the targets being airborne or ground-based, laser-based weapons offer some unique advantages, such as an immediate effect on the target and no further ammunition (except for the energy consumption of course). Yet I agree that for ground-based targets there exists a much wider option in terms of engagement, different to the case of BMD-related technology.

BTW defensetech.org reported, that the THEL was cancelled at some point last year. Any confirmation on that one?

 

[Patzek]

Well, concerning the technology itself, it might be promising. Also I am advocating the actual procurement of systems employing energy-based weapons, since I am under the impression, that such steps might contribute to the further development and refinement of next-generation-systems.
However I am still sceptical concerning the ABL, since it really is a very costly and complex system, mostly because of the chemical laser employed.

The solid-state-lasers seem to be preferable in terms of system cost and construction, yet the power output is rather unsatisfying right now.

Of course regardless of the targets being airborne or ground-based, laser-based weapons offer some unique advantages, such as an immediate effect on the target and no further ammunition (except for the energy consumption of course). Yet I agree that for ground-based targets there exists a much wider option in terms of engagement, different to the case of BMD-related technology.

BTW defensetech.org reported, that the THEL was cancelled at some point last year. Any confirmation on that one?

No this is false.
The THEL is still in tests by Israel and the US.
Rafael got another fund for it is the last couple of weeks.
and btw,
it is already active in the north and shot down 25 katyushas in 2001\2.
which was almost 85% from all the katyushas that was sent in this specific time.

 

[turin]

it is already active in the north and shot down 25 katyushas in 2001\2.
which was almost 85% from all the katyushas that was sent in this specific time.

The THEL is certainly not active. The claimed 25 Katyushas were intercepted as part of the tests in the US and not in real action in Israel. See:
http://www.defense-update.com/directory/THEL.htm
Also the funding for the whole system was cut in FY2005, therefore I seriously doubt that any fielding of combat-ready systems occurs in the near future.