Search the archive:
Simviation Main Site
|
Site Search
|
Upload Images
Simviation Forum
›
Real World
›
Real Aviation
› ABL Shoots Down Target
(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)
‹
Previous Topic
|
Next Topic
›
Pages: 1
ABL Shoots Down Target (Read 568 times)
Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 4:59pm
OVERLORD_CHRIS
Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC
Gender:
Posts: 1148
Quote:
Feb 12, 2010
By Amy Butler abutler@aviationweek.com
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency’s (MDA) Airborne Laser (ABL) has successfully engaged its first ballistic missile with its powerful chemical laser, shooting it down and demonstrating the concept of using high-powered lasers to destroy such threats in their boost phase of flight.
A series of flight tests included engagement of a single liquid-fueled ballistic missile and two solid-fueled Terrier Black Brant sounding rockets. Though not ballistic missiles, the rockets closely mimic a solid-fueled ballistic missile in the boost phase, the period in which ABL is expected to engage. And they offer a lower-cost alternative to launching actual short-range ballistic missile targets, according to Rick Lehner, an MDA spokesman.
During this long-awaited exercise Feb. 11, the 747-400F-based ABL testbed aircraft self-tracked a boosting liquid-fueled, short-range ballistic missile lofted from a mobile sea platform at 8:44 p.m. (PST) within seconds of launch. The onboard low-energy laser compensated for atmospheric disturbances and then the multimegawatt-class high-energy laser engaged the target, “heating the boosting ballistic missile to critical structural failure,” according to a statement from MDA officials. The engagement lasted about two minutes, the officials say.
Within one hour, MDA engaged the second target, a solid-fueled Terrier Black Brant, which was launched from a ground location. Lasing terminated prior to its destruction. MDA officials nonetheless say this demonstration “met all its test criteria,” but they do not cite a reason why the target was not fully lased to destruction.
The ABL did not land or reconstitute the chemicals used to form the laser between the two engagements.
This round, using the sounding rocket, was actually ABL’s third airborne target and its second airborne solid-fuel target engagement, according to MDA officials. The first was apparently quietly “destroyed” during a Feb. 3 flight test, according to MDA officials, though it is unclear why MDA is only just now acknowledging it.
ABL is designed to precisely lase the outer skin of a boosting missiles to prompt a failure in its structural integrity, destroying the target in flight.
These trials — previously expected last year — took place at a weapons range off of Point Mugu, Calif., and represent a leap forward for the ABL program. The Boeing-led effort has been challenged by numerous technical problems and cost overruns, although it has received much attention as the Pentagon’s flagship chemical laser program. As of last spring, about $4 billion had been spent on ABL. MDA is requesting another $99 million in Fiscal 2011 for directed energy projects, which includes funding for the ABL test bed, and for exploration of potential future applications.
This will be the last year MDA manages the system; following flight trials, it will be turned to the oversight of the Pentagon’s director of defense research and engineering to serve as a testbed for other laser projects.
These airborne shootdown tests were originally scheduled for 2002; most recently officials had hoped to execute it last fall.
Boeing officials noted the achievement, saying, “This experiment marks the first time a laser weapon has engaged and destroyed an in-flight ballistic missile, and the first time that any system has accomplished it in the missile’s boost phase of flight. ALTB [Airborne Laser Test Bed] has the highest-energy laser ever fired from an aircraft, and is the most powerful mobile laser device in the world.”
Northrop Grumman designed and built the high-energy chemical laser while Lockheed Martin supplied the beam control/fire control system for ABL.
There are no plans to produce this design, and as ABL has evolved Defense Dept. officials have become more interested in solid-state lasers. Still, MDA has left the door open to a possible operational system in the future that would build off the lessons learned from ABL.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/awx/2010/02/12/awx_02_1...
So the ABL (the Thing in My Sig) works like it is supposed to so far, just a few years latter then expected, and Just Last Year The Secretary of Defense wanted to cut funding on it. This right here opens up a new door for energy weapons if they can get its size reduced down so it can fit on 737's like they want it to.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #1 -
Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 6:14pm
Craig.
Offline
Colonel
Birmingham
Gender:
Posts: 18590
At what point do they then start considering it a ground based system?
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #2 -
Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 7:12pm
specter177
Offline
Colonel
Check out the Maverick
Flying Car!
I-TEC - X35
Gender:
Posts: 1406
Craig. wrote
on Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 6:14pm:
At what point do they then start considering it a ground based system?
Already have. Boeing is working on putting a solid state lase on a Hummer.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #3 -
Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 7:16pm
Craig.
Offline
Colonel
Birmingham
Gender:
Posts: 18590
What I mean is, when this becomes a legitimate defense option. At what point do they start replacing on mass things like the sam sites and such protecting airbases, Washington and so on. I can only guess that if it can take out an ICBM then it'll be able to dust off other forms of airbourne threats.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #4 -
Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 7:39pm
specter177
Offline
Colonel
Check out the Maverick
Flying Car!
I-TEC - X35
Gender:
Posts: 1406
Currently it's only been tested against boost phases. I don't know what it would do against a ballistic inbound threat. It should work pretty well against aircraft.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #5 -
Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 10:42pm
OVERLORD_CHRIS
Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC
Gender:
Posts: 1148
Craig. wrote
on Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 7:16pm:
What I mean is, when this becomes a legitimate defense option. At what point do they start replacing on mass things like the sam sites and such protecting airbases, Washington and so on. I can only guess that if it can take out an ICBM then it'll be able to dust off other forms of airborne threats.
It is part of the Triad, this is meant to take things out in the first stage, and reduce as much targets headed to the USA or other important targets as possible. Then shoot down what what gets passed with F-22's and F-15's, and PATRIOT system, and that should take care of 100% of the ICBM threat, especially from rouge nations....sine only the super powers have ICBM Subs
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #6 -
Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 11:30pm
specter177
Offline
Colonel
Check out the Maverick
Flying Car!
I-TEC - X35
Gender:
Posts: 1406
Here is the missile defense agency site:
http://www.mda.mil/system/system.html
It goes ABL - Ground Based Interceptor/SM-3 - Patriot/THAAD.
Also, SSBNs would probably be the first thing taken out during any war with China or Russia.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #7 -
Feb 13
th
, 2010 at 2:17am
OVERLORD_CHRIS
Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC
Gender:
Posts: 1148
specter177 wrote
on Feb 12
th
, 2010 at 11:30pm:
Here is the missile defense agency site:
http://www.mda.mil/system/system.html
It goes ABL - Ground Based Interceptor/SM-3 - Patriot/THAAD.
Also, SSBNs would probably be the first thing taken out during any war with China or Russia.
Yeah I was looking at it from the: Russia is part of the UN, and should not do any thing, and China seems to be going away from aggressiveness, and are concerned about some crazy nut job in the middle east getting one.
On that web site, I don't see how a Predator is going to stop an ICBM or Nuke Scud.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #8 -
Feb 13
th
, 2010 at 10:04am
Meck
Offline
Colonel
EDQK - FSX
Bavaria
Gender:
Posts: 1673
At what range to the thread is the ABL (or any ground based system) supposed to operate? Anyone knows how far the ABL was from the boost-section?
Since a LASER might be a mid-range weapon (like a PATRIOT or anything similar) in clean air, but what about clouds/rain/snow? The watermolecules will leak(?) the LASER beam quite rapidly or will at least lower it's intensity I guess...
excuse bad grammar; "I' bin Bayer..." - German Airforce Private First Class (war reserve)
FS Amilo 3667G - AMD Turion64 1,80GHz ... 2GB RAM ... ATI Mob.Radeon X700 ... WinXP Pro
NEW: Intel Core i7-2600K 3,40GHz ... 8GB Corsair Vengeance blue RAM ... nVidia 570GTX Twin FrozrIII ... 120GB ForceGT Corsair SSD + (FSX on) WD 500GB blue ... MSI Z68A-G45 ... Win7 Pro x64
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #9 -
Feb 13
th
, 2010 at 1:01pm
OVERLORD_CHRIS
Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC
Gender:
Posts: 1148
They said they solved that problem, and that the range is classified, but you figure at 35,00ft up, and it is supposed to be able to hit an ICBM coming out the silo if they know where it is, so the range has to be pretty good.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #10 -
Feb 13
th
, 2010 at 1:55pm
Meck
Offline
Colonel
EDQK - FSX
Bavaria
Gender:
Posts: 1673
I just read the
YAL-1 article on wiki
: they say it has to be within a few hundret kilometers to the TBM or ICBM-launcher. And as they arm at the hot exhaust of a missile they have about 1min. before the missile goes ballistic I'd say from knowing PATRIOT LFK's. So you have to be quite near to the enemy - with an aircraft that isn't quite capable of air combat (even if in company with fighters and/or electronic warfare a/c).
And as an addition: they say use against ground targets seems unlikely because of the dense atmosphere would weaken the beam...
excuse bad grammar; "I' bin Bayer..." - German Airforce Private First Class (war reserve)
FS Amilo 3667G - AMD Turion64 1,80GHz ... 2GB RAM ... ATI Mob.Radeon X700 ... WinXP Pro
NEW: Intel Core i7-2600K 3,40GHz ... 8GB Corsair Vengeance blue RAM ... nVidia 570GTX Twin FrozrIII ... 120GB ForceGT Corsair SSD + (FSX on) WD 500GB blue ... MSI Z68A-G45 ... Win7 Pro x64
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #11 -
Feb 14
th
, 2010 at 3:41pm
The Ruptured Duck
Offline
Colonel
Legally sane since yesterday!
Wichita, KS
Gender:
Posts: 2614
I'm not clear as to why its taken so long to get this working. From what I've been told the laser itself has been operational for some time now.
"If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are dead and rotten, either write things worth reading, or do things worth the writing" -Ben Franklin&&&&"Man must rise above the Earth to the top of the atmosphere and beyond, for only thus will he fully understand the world in which he lives." - Socrates&&&&" Flying is a religion. A religion that asymilates all who get a taste of it." - Me&&&&"Make the most out of yourself, for that is all there is of you"- Ralf Waldo Emerson&&
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #12 -
Feb 15
th
, 2010 at 4:21pm
OVERLORD_CHRIS
Offline
Colonel
No C-17B's, C-5M's for
Every One!
Chalreston SC
Gender:
Posts: 1148
Meck wrote
on Feb 13
th
, 2010 at 1:55pm:
And as an addition: they say use against ground targets seems unlikely because of the dense atmosphere would weaken the beam...
2nd video explains why we don't trust wiki.
The Ruptured Duck wrote
on Feb 14
th
, 2010 at 3:41pm:
I'm not clear as to why its taken so long to get this working. From what I've been told the laser itself has been operational for some time now.
From what I have been following through out the years, is they kept redesigning stuff, because they did not know how the chemicals would hold up on the composits they used, so rather then risk unforeseen factors, they went back and had to use metals that they know would hold up. And as a resulted took more time to test, and added weight, and they had to try and get the weight back down, but lucky for them they started with a -400 Freighter unlike VC-25 and E-4B which as we all know were based off of the -200 Freighter,so it was able to cope with the all the design changes and lift the added weight that was not supposed to be there. And they had to do this throughout the majority of the chemical parts.
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZPKJ9TEzDA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dJg5wiKMQo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIbPpiSdHz8
News cast: Thankfully he points out that Russia & China are not our enemy's, but that North Korea, and Iran threaten every one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSsn0u7U1VA
Back to top
IP Logged
Pages: 1
‹
Previous Topic
|
Next Topic
›
« Home
‹ Board
Top of this page
Forum Jump »
Home
» 10 most recent Posts
» 10 most recent Topics
Current Flight Simulator Series
- Flight Simulator X
- FS 2004 - A Century of Flight
- Adding Aircraft Traffic (AI) & Gates
- Flight School
- Flightgear
- MS Flight
Graphic Gallery
- Simviation Screenshots Showcase
- Screenshot Contest
- Edited Screenshots
- Photos & Cameras
- Payware Screenshot Showcase
- Studio V Screenshot Workshop
- Video
- The Cage
Design Forums
- Aircraft & 3D Design
- Scenery & Panel Design
- Aircraft Repainting
- Designer Feedback
General
- General Discussion
- Humour
- Music, Arts & Entertainment
- Sport
Computer Hardware & Software Forum
- Hardware
- Tweaking & Overclocking
- Computer Games & Software
- HomeBuild Cockpits
Addons Most Wanted
- Aircraft Wanted
- Other Add-ons Wanted
Real World
- Real Aviation ««
- Specific Aircraft Types
- Autos
- History
On-line Interactive Flying
- Virtual Airlines Events & Messages
- Multiplayer
Simviation Site
- Simviation News & Info
- Suggestions for these forums
- Site Questions & Feedback
- Site Problems & Broken Links
Combat Flight Simulators
- Combat Flight Simulator 3
- Combat Flight Simulator 2
- Combat Flight Simulator
- CFS Development
- IL-2 Sturmovik
Other Websites
- Your Site
- Other Sites
Payware
- Payware
Old Flight Simulator Series
- FS 2002
- FS 2000
- Flight Simulator 98
Simviation Forum
» Powered by
YaBB 2.5 AE
!
YaBB Forum Software
© 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.