Download the
Tom's Guide App from the AppsStore
News and trends on internet
/ mobile / "sound & picture" / IT
Yes No

VIDEO: Ballistic Missile Destroyed by Laser

- By - Source : Tom's Guide US

Planes are awesome. Jumbo jets are even better and jumbo jets with laser attachments are better still, because they can shoot missiles out of the sky.

Last week, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency's Airborne Laser Testbed (ALTB) took out a test missile over the Pacific ocean. The missile was launched from an at-sea mobile launch platform and within seconds, the ALTB used onboard sensors to detect the boosting missile and used a low-energy laser to track the target. A second low-energy laser was fired to measure and compensate for atmospheric disturbance before the ALTB finally fired its megawatt-class High Energy Laser, heating the boosting ballistic missile to critical structural failure. The entire engagement occurred within two minutes of the target missile launch, while its rocket motors were still thrusting.

Up until now, only pictures of the event were available. Today, we have video. Check it out below.

Boeing's Airborne Laser Feb. 11, 2010 test

Share:
71
Comments
X

Comments

Anonymous 02/17/2010 5:08 AM
Show
drakefyre 02/17/2010 5:12 AM
Hide
-13+

It's useful because Iran could and probably is developing nuclear weapons. With lasers you can actually destroy attacking missiles before they strike. I am sure nobody wants nukes hitting their country.

liquid0h 02/17/2010 5:12 AM
Hide
-20+

If they added the sharks, that would top this off...

maban 02/17/2010 5:18 AM
Hide
-0+

Damn, I wanted the missile to win.

foody 02/17/2010 5:19 AM
Hide
-20+

jinxyjoo :
Tell me why this is useful? Why are we spending so much money on defense when it isn't necessary and instead focus on things like green/reusable energy, things that will actually become important once the oil crash hits.


Good point, why would we ever want to defend ourselves?

Honis 02/17/2010 5:29 AM
Hide
-6+

jinxyjoo :
Tell me why this is useful? Why are we spending so much money on defense when it isn't necessary and instead focus on things like green/reusable energy, things that will actually become important once the oil crash hits.


If it makes you feel any better, the defense budget last year had 2 of these planes cut before production began. I for one can't wait till the technology makes it into fighters and replaces ballistic systems with this insanely accurate form of annihilation.

Also, in before mirror missile. (Little secret, they wont work due to defects found in even the most perfectly made mirrors.)

fpsdominator 02/17/2010 5:41 AM
Hide
-20+

jinxyjoo :
Tell me why this is useful? Why are we spending so much money on defense when it isn't necessary and instead focus on things like green/reusable energy, things that will actually become important once the oil crash hits.



We wouldn't have to worry about renewable energy if you tree hugging liberals let the U.S use Nuclear Power Plants. Its free Energy!!! Why not use it???

zoemayne 02/17/2010 5:45 AM
Hide
--2+

This is good hopefully we can use lasers to replace patriot missiles. Remember those!?

zoemayne 02/17/2010 5:47 AM
Hide
-0+

jinxyjoo :
Tell me why this is useful? Why are we spending so much money on defense when it isn't necessary and instead focus on things like green/reusable energy, things that will actually become important once the oil crash hits.


North Korea already has nuclear missiles. And they are the most serious threat IMO. Iran is more of a threat to Israel.

SpinachEater 02/17/2010 6:06 AM
Hide
-8+

Wow, you know this is going into a satellite next

Dawgsoverrebs 02/17/2010 6:19 AM
Hide
-13+

jinxyjoo :
Tell me why this is useful? Why are we spending so much money on defense when it isn't necessary and instead focus on things like green/reusable energy, things that will actually become important once the oil crash hits.



Ok I'm not sure what is going through your head I hope to God its a joke. I always knew liberals were stupid but please this is going a little too far.

nottheking 02/17/2010 6:31 AM
Hide
-5+

Technically, North Korea doesn't have nuclear missiles; they have have a nuclear bomb design that they've tested, (albeit a speculated "fizzle," as the test yields were far below that of other country's early nuke tests) and they also have some ballistic missile technology.

However, building a nuke is one thing; making one small and durable enough to fit in the tip of a missile and survive the searing heat of a >10,000MPH atmospheric re-entry is another. There's also a question of range; N.K. has no ICBMs; their proposed, bulky Taepodong-2 missile has consistently had a spectacular failure on each of the tests they've made, and even if it worked, it might only BARELY classify as "intercontinental;" it could potentially reach the Aleutian Islands and some parts of Alaska, but be far, far from being able to reach the rest of the USA.

Still, a strong, functional anti-missile defense is important, as if the USA manages to build a combined system that can render nuclear missiles useless, then no countries will bother trying to make them anymore; America will have succeeded in making nukes obsolete, hence eliminating the shadow of potential nuclear war...

So really, is perhaps a try for world peace (or at least, a world free of nuclear weapons) not as important as hare-brained schemes to produce "green" energy that actually wind up yielding more pollution than more conventional means?

sseyler 02/17/2010 6:37 AM
Show
xbeater 02/17/2010 6:49 AM
Hide
-5+

sseyler :
I am a liberal and I can assure you that I'm far from stupid.



well that previous comment was pretty stupid.


anyways, that vid wasn't particularly convincing either, show me a daytime vid and I might believe it.

anamaniac 02/17/2010 7:30 AM
Hide
-0+

I hate it when we develop new types of bombs, but I'm all for defencive weaponry (assuming it's used for defence only).

How long until we get a totally sick satellite array of gigawatt lasers?

asdf634 02/17/2010 7:41 AM
Show
Anonymous 02/17/2010 7:41 AM
Hide
-8+

--We wouldn't have to worry about renewable energy if you tree hugging liberals let the U.S use Nuclear Power Plants. Its free Energy!!! Why not use it???

I love nuclear power actually; however, Its not free it costs more per watt then other resources currently. And if the world were to completely switch over to nuclear power we would exhaust the world supply of uranium in one generation.

--Ok I'm not sure what is going through your head I hope to God its a joke. I always knew liberals were stupid but please this is going a little too far.

What exactly is stupid? The fact that I think the defense budget could be smaller or my comment about the oil crash? The oil crash is comming, do your research. We have already peaked. At this point the world is pumping far more oil out of the ground then the amount of new oil found. If the world doesnt start to invest in renewable energy such as wind, solar, or hydro by the time the usa, middle east, and russia run out then we will plummit into a society that matches the technology of the amish. This will also result in massive shortages of food. We can hardly feed all the mouths now what do you think will happen when the nearly free cost energy recieved from oil is gone?

Oh and where is this liberal crap coming from? I dont care about politics and I dont brand myself as liberal or conservative, republican or democrat.

Go ahead and give me a thumbs down. But if you are open minded and realize our lifestyles are not sustainable unless serious actions are taken then thumbs up :).

Anonymous 02/17/2010 7:50 AM
Hide
--3+

--We wouldn't have to worry about renewable energy if you tree hugging liberals let the U.S use Nuclear Power Plants. Its free Energy!!! Why not use it???

Oh, and just so you know obama has just approved a program that's going to build new powerplant(s), down in Georgia I think.

And I must insist that to all the conservatives who call people "tree hugging liberals", which makes up a great number, it isn't an insult so you can stop saying it. You may find it insulting but to those who do actually care about the environment, it really isn't. It's morally right to care for the environment, god forbid some people think raping the planet is not a good idea. The earth isn't yours to own.

nottheking 02/17/2010 7:54 AM
Hide
-2+

anamaniac :
How long until we get a totally sick satellite array of gigawatt lasers?


Probably not for a while; given the cost of launching a sattelite is directly proportional to its mass, (it takes ~$1,000US per pound to launch it to orbit) huge satellites are often impractical, and usually cap out at a single ton or so. The YAL-1, the plane shown used for the test in the article, is based on a model that, when fully loaded, can weigh over 400 tons. (it's a modified Boeing 747-400)

So there it's a question of what can be had to supply enough power for the laser; plenty of methods exist for the ENERGY, but you need POWER. (power being the capability to supply tons of energy in a very short span of time)

One of the early proposals in Reagan's "Star Wars" SDI was a network of such; to get the power, they would be equipped with miniature nuclear bombs, that would detonate, with the rest of the equipment harnessing that power to fire the laser. Obviously, such design entailed them being both extremely expensive and good for a single shot only.

zipz0p 02/17/2010 9:10 AM
Hide
-7+

The comments here seem quite inane and really to miss the political point of a missile defense system - it puts the US in a huge position of power. With a sufficiently strong system (which I seriously doubt is feasible), the US could launch attacks on any country without fear of retribution. Most countries will see that as unfair, and feel threatened (as many already do by the US, without a working missile defense system). I could see this working to increase hostile feelings toward the US, which is what really increases the danger to the country and its people.

As for the laser - this was probably a non-reflectively coated missile, and it was clearly at close range. I realize that even the best mirrors have imperfections, are only reflective in certain frequency ranges, and have finite transmission/absorption, but a mirror coating could reduce energy absorption sufficiently to let the chemical lasers burn themselves out before the missile heats up enough to cause failure. Also, how likely is it that we will have this modified 747 in the air at the right location when it matters? This is an interesting proof of concept, though - I have long been a doubter.

As for nuclear power, I am liberal (and not a complete idiot), and am all for it. I think it is safe and clean, and a very good idea. However, it is not sufficient to meet all of our power needs, and research into alternative power sources seems like a great investment in the energy safety of our future, as well as a great economic investment - the US could be the dominant source for future power solutions and technologies, if wise investments are made now.

Zingam 02/17/2010 9:28 AM
Show
Anonymous 02/17/2010 9:30 AM
Hide
-7+

this is completely retarded.

anyone who wanted to nuke america could easily just sneak a couple in over the border. no missiles necessary. lord knows enough drugs come into this country every day.

in reality there is absolutely NO WAY to really defend against an attack. ANY defense system will always have some vulnerability or way to go around it.

instead maybe we should focus on creating goodwill with other nations so maybe they wouldnt want to kill us as much.

JaguarOne 02/17/2010 10:24 AM
Hide
-6+

nottheking :
Still, a strong, functional anti-missile defense is important, as if the USA manages to build a combined system that can render nuclear missiles useless, then no countries will bother trying to make them anymore; America will have succeeded in making nukes obsolete, hence eliminating the shadow of potential nuclear war...So really, is perhaps a try for world peace (or at least, a world free of nuclear weapons) not as important as hare-brained schemes to produce "green" energy that actually wind up yielding more pollution than more conventional means?




you do understand that the US is the country with the most (with a trailing second) nuclear weapons right? Building weapons saying that it will deprecate other weapons is not an argument for peace

bin1127 02/17/2010 11:16 AM
Hide
-0+

so you really can see the laser? oh yaa star wars here we come!

sceen311 02/17/2010 11:49 AM
Show
jkkj 02/17/2010 12:12 PM
Show
dargon_supreme 02/17/2010 12:22 PM
Hide
-0+

Next step: missile with laser reflexive cover.

Pailin 02/17/2010 12:46 PM
Show
Pailin 02/17/2010 12:50 PM
Hide
-2+

The reflective covering might work...

But a 2nd skin allowing a cooling airflow beneath it certainly would.

Like landrovers in Africa have a 2nd skin roof to help keep the heat from the sun off - simple, cheap and works great ;)

ewood 02/17/2010 1:26 PM
Hide
-1+

Drakefyre :
It's useful because Iran could and probably is developing nuclear weapons. With lasers you can actually destroy attacking missiles before they strike. I am sure nobody wants nukes hitting their country.



What we really need is to spend government funding to find Dr Manhattan... Anyway I think this is very cool that it actually works and should be developed.

ewood 02/17/2010 1:31 PM
Hide
-5+

fpsdominator :
We wouldn't have to worry about renewable energy if you tree hugging liberals let the U.S use Nuclear Power Plants. Its free Energy!!! Why not use it???


Amen! I'm from vermont and pretty liberal compared to many, but I fail to see the faults in using nuclear energy. %99.99 of peoples reasons for hating it are based on ignorance and lack of education. If they took to time to learn the process and and the numerous safety measures put in place (VT yankee has 9 discreet systems that would ALL have to fail for any amount of radiation to be released)they would realize how great an alternative it is to coal, natural gas, wood chips, wind and solar.