backtop


Print 121 comment(s) - last by TheGreek.. on Aug 31 at 1:35 PM


Laser weaonry may not be that far away from tomorrow's battlefields.  (Source: Wired, Danger Room)
The U.S. will possibly field man-sized portable laser weapons in coming years

One of the cornerstones of science fiction films and books is the laser rifle. The U.S. has spent millions of dollars trying to field laser weapons to do all sorts of tasks and, according to some analysts, we are getting close to fielding man portable laser weapons.

Time Magazine tells the story about developments in laser weaponry, circa 1972. Many of us are familiar with the laser weapons that are being designed to stop ballistic missiles before the warhead can separate from the missile body. These tend to be very large lasers that are mounted on trucks or inside specially outfitted aircraft.

One type of laser weapon that has yet to materialize is the man-sized portable laser. The lasers were described as being able to burn a quarter-inch hole in an enemy solider from as far away as five miles.  And, unlike Star Wars, real world lasers leave no visible trail.

The weapon would be a snipers dream since the laser beam would travel at the speed of light; once the target was in the sights, a hit was ensured. Another benefit of portable laser weapons is the fact that a laser beam follows a flat trajectory rather than a curving arc like a projectile. Gravity has practically no effect on a laser beam, so lining up a shot at extreme distances is much easier to do with a laser rifle than with a projectile weapon.

These laser weapons have yet to materialize and with the drawbacks of chemical laser technology, namely the storage of corrosive chemicals and harmful fumes resulting from the laser operation, who knows when or if man portable laser weapons will be perfected.

Chemical lasers get energy from a rapid chemical reaction and obtain continuous wave with power at the megawatt level. Common types of chemical lasers used in drilling and military applications include chemical oxygen iodine laser, all gas-phase iodine laser, and deuterium fluoride laser.  Almost all laser-based weapons to date have been chemical based.

Yet there are still some laser weapon technologies that could bring the long dreamed of laser gun to fruition. Solid-state lasers, the oldest and most mature types of lasers, are one of the more viable options since they don’t require corrosive chemicals to produce the laser beam. The solid-state laser simply requires a supply of electricity to produce a beam, and only needs enough power for a single pulse rather than a continuous beam.

Current solid-state lasers are used for everything from tattoo removal to optical refrigeration. However, unlike gas and chemical lasers, solid-state lasers cannot achieve megawatt capabilities without vast amounts of electricity -- not practical for mobile forces.  Yet kilowatt lasers may be enough for soldiers on the ground. 

From Boeing's $7 million High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator, to Northrop Grumman's $57 million Joint High Power Solid State Laser, 100kW portable solid-state lasers can now fit the size of a truck.

According to Wired we cold see solid-state pulse lasers fielded by U.S. soldiers in as little as two years. Of course, according to the Time's 1972 article on laser technology, man-sized portable laser weapons would have been viable for a decade now.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Refelction?
By SilthDraeth on 8/28/2007 4:57:54 PM , Rating: 2
I want proof that .223 tumbles in the air to create larger wounds. I have fired the M-16, AR-15 (same thing basically) and a Galil, not at humans, but at targets, and the point of entry was always a perfect little hole, just like using a .22LR.

I call bullshit on your theory of the .223. As for a wounded soldier removing at least three, that is accurate.


RE: Refelction?
By Ajax9000 on 8/28/2007 8:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
Try and track down a copy of the The Stockholm Peace Research Institute's "Anti-personnel Weapons" by Malvern Lumsden (published 1978?). It goes into detail regarding the differences between the 7.62mm and 5.56mm rounds.

Basically, the 7.62mm rounds are sufficently big and heavy that they generally punch straight through the body before tumbling (full metal jacket military rounds). The 5.56mm rounds are smaller and lighter and generally tumble within the body creating greater trauma -- in fact the tumbling forces can be sufficent to rip apart a full metal jacket round (leaving lots of fragments to remove from the victim).

The book reports that, all-in-all, 5.56mm rounds are more lethal due to this greater trauma.


RE: Refelction?
By SilthDraeth on 8/29/2007 9:53:27 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The book reports that, all-in-all, 5.56mm rounds are more lethal due to this greater trauma.


Ok so tumbling within. I guess I misunderstood his statement.

But your last line somewhat contradicts his post. If it is more lethal do to more trauma, then it was probably chosen for that reason, not to inflict more wounded upon the enemy.

But who knows, it could be either way.


RE: Refelction?
By Ajax9000 on 8/29/2007 8:06:04 PM , Rating: 2
I was partly agreeing and partly disagreeing with FastLaneTX as his post was rather muddled -- e.g. the implication that small wounds from big bullets are more lethal than big wounds from small bullets!? :-)


"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki