USN successfully tests AAL.

[SilverHawk]

Just officially released, the United States Navy has successfully tested a ground based anti air laser in an over the water based engagment against 4 target drones. The system uses the Mk.15 CIWS mount of yore.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162- ... 01465.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTpP412f ... r_embedded

[Coyote]

Ahoy, me hearties, and commence primary ignition-- yaarrrr!

[Pelranius]

I wonder at what point do the law of diminishing returns kicks in with regards to scaling up the size of the AAL?

[Corpsman]

Now we should change our recruiting ads to "A global force for good... with lasers."

[SirNitram]

This is downright badass. Can it do anything useful to aircraft in a reasonable time-on-target?

[SilverHawk]

Takes about 15 seconds for the drone to be neutralized in the video. Not sure how that translates to a manned aircraft.

[Molyneux]

Mosquito-lasers, writ large?
Science fiction moves one step closer...though I really would rather see the funds spent on something non-military.

[Kanastrous]

It might be reasonable to hope for beneficial spin-off technologies. Although I'll admit that right now I can't guess at what those are most likely to be.

Super-large-diameter blu-rays, maybe. Or orbital lasers that can vaporize mosquitoes over continental areas.

[Darmalus]

If you want an idea for non-military applications, try Laser Rockets! The laser is mounted on the ground, and the rocket has a layer of ablative plastic on the bottom which is vaporized by the laser.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

They are using a form of incoherent beam combining that is horrendously inefficient (and horrendous beam quality of M^2 > 1 at least) compared to the Northrop Grumman 100KW laser demonstrated last year.

Raytheon was originally using some fiber lasers from IPG Photonics from Germany to do the job, but I think they returned the lasers and went along another route.

[LaCroix]

Takes about 15 seconds for the drone to be neutralized in the video. Not sure how that translates to a manned aircraft.

Laser Pointers pose a threat to manned aricrafts. One swipe with that thing across the canopy and the pilot is blind - probably permanent!

[cosmicalstorm]

Yes that is a nasty problem. I believe at least one or two American pilots have already lost their sight to those weapons.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Takes about 15 seconds for the drone to be neutralized in the video. Not sure how that translates to a manned aircraft.

Laser Pointers pose a threat to manned aricrafts. One swipe with that thing across the canopy and the pilot is blind - probably permanent!

Well... a laser designator would do a permanent job. A KW level pulse at 1064nm will definitely fry the eyeball.

[LaCroix]

Which means that this weapon is fully operational. You would down a manned aircraft within seconds. And even if the pilot bails out, he will never fly again. Effective...

[SilverHawk]

For some reason I got the mental image of the Death star from Episode IV about to obliterate alderaan but instead of firing a super-laser, it fires a dazzler-laser and blinds some poor smuck on the planet's surface.

[TimothyC]

Which means that this weapon is fully operational. You would down a manned aircraft within seconds. And even if the pilot bails out, he will never fly again. Effective...

Except in 1995 the US ratified the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, which includes:

Article 1
It is prohibited to employ laser weapons specifically designed, as their sole combat function or as one of their combat functions, to cause permanent blindness to unenhanced vision, that is to the naked eye or to the eye with corrective eyesight devices. The High Contracting Parties shall not transfer such weapons to any State or non-State entity.

Article 2
In the employment of laser systems, the High Contracting Parties shall take all feasible precautions to avoid the incidence of permanent blindness to unenhanced vision. Such precautions shall include training of their armed forces and other practical measures.

Article 3
Blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment of laser systems, including laser systems used against optical equipment, is not covered by the prohibition of this Protocol.

Article 4
For the purpose of this protocol "permanent blindness" means irreversible and uncorrectable loss of vision which is seriously disabling with no prospect of recovery. Serious disability is equivalent to visual acuity of less than 20/200 Snellen measured using both eyes.

Stupid UN convention.

[Simon_Jester]

Takes about 15 seconds for the drone to be neutralized in the video. Not sure how that translates to a manned aircraft.

Laser Pointers pose a threat to manned aricrafts. One swipe with that thing across the canopy and the pilot is blind - probably permanent!

Well... a laser designator would do a permanent job. A KW level pulse at 1064nm will definitely fry the eyeball.

Thing is, Nd-YAG lasers (the ones that run at 1064nm) aren't really that hard to shield against. I know people who work around them, and they have goggles that are very good at blocking out that frequency range.

It would be far from impossible to build pilots' headgear with protective tinting that blocks a few specific frequencies of laser light without too much trouble, so you'd need another damage mechanism aside from relying on being able to blind the pilot.

[Aaron]

I wouldn't be surprised if it already happens. Just before I got out of the army they had started to bring in ballistic glasses with similar properties.

[LaCroix]

Except in 1995 the US ratified the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, which includes: *snip*

As this is only a side effect, and the wave-lenght was not explicitly chosen to have maximum effect on the human eye, this could be excused away, like so many treaties before. That laser was made to burn a hole through a plane.

I believe if that laser hits the canopy, it won't take much time to fry the pilot, instead of just his eyes.
Googles are fine, but at this wattage, the googles will melt from the absorbtion, and clothing/helmets will melt or catch fire. Canopy is transparent, so it will hold up, but the pilot would be lucky if he only gets blinded instead of BBQ-ed.

Another question: It took 15 seconds to down an unarmed drone. How many seconds before the armament of a fighter blows up?

[Sea Skimmer]

Which means that this weapon is fully operational. You would down a manned aircraft within seconds. And even if the pilot bails out, he will never fly again. Effective...

Except that we've had laser protective goggles for pilots for decades now, and that's not even counting the PLTZ goggles for nuclear flash. Laser blinding isn't a remotely new threat as portable lasers with enough power to burn eyeballs have been around since the late 1960s.

[LaCroix]

Which means that this weapon is fully operational. You would down a manned aircraft within seconds. And even if the pilot bails out, he will never fly again. Effective...

Except that we've had laser protective goggles for pilots for decades now, and that's not even counting the PLTZ goggles for nuclear flash. Laser blinding isn't a remotely new threat as portable lasers with enough power to burn eyeballs have been around since the late 1960s.

I doubt the googles will protect from this kind of wattage...

[Sea Skimmer]

I doubt the googles will protect from this kind of wattage...

Maybe maybe not, but after a point the canopy on the jet would turn opaque anyway. Those canopies are lined with gold too as emissions shielding, which would also help reduce the threat from lasers. Modern PLTZ masks meanwhile will protect the entire face from nuclear flash up to the point that the blast would bring down the aircraft, so no way is a laser blinding a pilot with those before it just shoots it down. So all and blinding is not something I would much worry about from weapon grade lasers. Its only a threat if you ignore that it exists. Blinding would work at much greater ranges then destruction, but I would only invite the enemy to give away his laser firing unit position without costing me an aircraft in the process. I would be more concerned about damage to optical sensors, these are more sensitive then the human eye and thus are likely to be more easily damaged.

Of course since the US has the best lasers, and we are already incredibly prolific with them, the laser rangefinder on every single tank could be a blinding weapon easily for example, they have shielding over the lens to stop that, is an enemy really going to want to start fighting us this way? I don't really think so. Anyone with equal laser tech is bound to have nukes as well anyway so that kind of fight is just going to turn into WW3. Lucky deterrence has worked so far, and at least with folks like China is likely to keep working.

But against weaker powers, using using laser blinding weapons would only be to the advantage of the US. Only lasers which cause permanent damage are banned by that UN convention, but imagine a formation of helicopter gunships using a diffused setting on the laser designators to temporarily blind third world militia while an air assault force lands. This would be highly effective, and it would reduce civilian losses too since the gunships aren't hosing down the whole area with 30mm and rockets. You could go even further by having the Active Denial System on the belly of one of the choppers and use that to generally force everyone in the area behind cover.

[cosmicalstorm]

This was the incident I referred to earlier.

Russian merchant ships used in spying

By Bill Gertz
The Washington Times
Published 11/6/00

Russian merchant ships are spying on U.S. nuclear submarines in the Pacific Northwest and reporting the information to Moscow's military intelligence service, according to classified U.S. intelligence reports.

The classified July 2000 CIA report obtained by The Washington Times states that recent intelligence "provides the first solid evidence of long-suspected Russian merchant ship intelligence collection efforts against U.S. nuclear submarine bases."

The confirmation challenges the official Pentagon response to the April 1997 incident involving the firing of a laser at a U.S. intelligence officer and Canadian helicopter pilot as they photographed the Russian merchant ship Kapitan Man as it spied on a nuclear missile submarine in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, north of Seattle.

One of the Russian crew is believed to have fired the laser device at a Canadian helicopter, causing permanent damage to the eyes of Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jack Daly, an intelligence officer, and Canadian Capt. Pat Barnes, the helicopter pilot.

Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon said at the time there was no evidence the Kapitan Man was engaged in intelligence gathering.

According to the CIA report, stamped "secret," the cargo ship Kapitan Konev informed intelligence officials in Vladivostok about a "visual contact" with a U.S. submarine while transiting the Strait of Juan de Fuca on its way to Seattle. The strait is a major transit point for U.S. nuclear missile submarines heading out to sea from Submarine Group Nine based in Bremerton, Wash.

The CIA stated the Kapitan Konev identified the U.S. submarine as a ballistic missile sub. However, other intelligence reports obtained by The Times stated that a Russian national, identified only as "Anatoli Anatolyevich," notified Vladivostok that he had spotted the USS Parche, an attack submarine used in U.S. covert operations.

Russia is continuing to spy on U.S. warships and submarines and some Pentagon officials fear the data could be sold or leaked to international terrorists, like those who bombed the destroyer USS Cole last month.

A separate National Security Agency report stated that a spy on the Kapitan Konev on July 7 contacted Vladivostok "to report a submerged/sinking ship was headed out to sea" through the strait.

The NSA report said the ship made two "intelligence reports" on the submarine activities. A second, more detailed message was sent later that contained more data on the Parche and on the movement of other U.S. and Canadian military vessels.

"This ship [Kapitan Konev] is among a larger list of special interest vessels that have engaged in suspicious or anomalous activities on one or more occasions," the NSA report said.

The CIA report stated, "Ships operating under the control of the Far Eastern Shipping Co. (FESCO), such as the Kapitan Konev, have been involved in numerous incidents in the vicinity of U.S. submarines since 1992, when Seattle and Tacoma ports were opened to Russian merchant ships," the report said. "FESCO presumably relays information on U.S. naval movements to Russia's Pacific Fleet Naval Intelligence Center in Vladivostok."

According to the CIA report, the Kapitan Konev "delayed its departure from Port Angeles, Washington in May 1997, allowing it to close to approximately 2,000 yards of a departing U.S. ballistic missile submarine."

Neither report mentioned the April 1997 incident involving the Kapitan Man and the Canadian surveillance helicopter that was photographing the ship's antenna array.

The report, however, did mention another spying incident involving the Kapitan Man. It said the "FESCO-owned Kapitan Man in November 1996 was the only merchant ship requesting anchorage in the Strait of Juan de Fuca as a result of inclement weather."

"Coincidentally, a surfaced U.S. submarine was transiting inbound through the strait," the report said.

During the April 1997 laser incident the Kapitan Man was detained and searched but no laser device was found.

U.S. investigators were limited by the State Department from conducting a thorough search and the Russian Embassy in Washington was notified in advance of the search by the department, giving the Russian crew time to hide or dispose of a hand-held laser, according to Pentagon officials.

Pentagon officials have said privately the incident was covered up in order to avoid upsetting relations with Russia. Before the incident, Vice President Al Gore met with Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin and discussed loosening customs controls on Russian ships entering U.S. ports.

Documents obtained by The Times in 1997 said the incident was kept secret "due to the sensitivity of the incident," even though a U.S. serviceman had been injured in a hostile action.

A Pentagon investigation later determined that it could not prove a laser was fired by someone on board the ship. The Pentagon also said at the time there was no evidence to indicate the Kapitan Man was engaged in spying on U.S. submarines.

Cmdr. Daly was later targeted for "reprisal" and twice passed over for promotion after testifying before Congress on the eye injuries he sustained during the intelligence mission. However, the Navy inspector general investigating the matter reported that he had been treated unfairly and was promoted. Cmdr. Daly's injuries, and those of Capt. Barnes, have not healed.

Another classified Pentagon intelligence report produced before the NSA and CIA reports stated that spy agencies could not find "conclusive evidence implicating commercial maritime vessels of the Russian Federation in deliberate intelligence collection" against the United States and Canada.

The report stated that numerous "anomalous events" supported the belief that Russian commercial ships are spying for Moscow. "However, in all cases, no evidence that conclusively implicates Russian vessels in intelligence activities in North American waters has been discerned," the report said.

"The CIA found the conclusive evidence," said one U.S. government official.

The Pentagon report said that between February 1999 and May 2000 there were nearly three dozen cases in which Russian merchant ships spied on non-Russian vessels.

The reports included identification of numerous U.S. Navy warships, as well as British, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian ships and an Algerian Kilo-class submarine.

The report also stated that Russian Far East merchant and fishing ships "continue to participate in Russian command and control exercises directed by the General Staff and the Navy Main staff."

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Thing is, Nd-YAG lasers (the ones that run at 1064nm) aren't really that hard to shield against. I know people who work around them, and they have goggles that are very good at blocking out that frequency range.

It would be far from impossible to build pilots' headgear with protective tinting that blocks a few specific frequencies of laser light without too much trouble, so you'd need another damage mechanism aside from relying on being able to blind the pilot.

I take it you haven't exactly seen what happens when you actually focus the KW-MW pulse onto a spot. It's quite fascinating to see that little bright spot of plasma...

[Simon_Jester]

As this is only a side effect, and the wave-lenght was not explicitly chosen to have maximum effect on the human eye, this could be excused away, like so many treaties before. That laser was made to burn a hole through a plane.

I believe if that laser hits the canopy, it won't take much time to fry the pilot, instead of just his eyes.
Googles are fine, but at this wattage, the googles will melt from the absorbtion, and clothing/helmets will melt or catch fire. Canopy is transparent, so it will hold up, but the pilot would be lucky if he only gets blinded instead of BBQ-ed.

Nitpick: "googles" is a form of the verb "to google," which is in turn based on the name of the online search engine Google.

"Goggles" are large pieces of eyewear that cover the eye from all angles and serve as eye protection (generally against high temperatures, dangerous gases, or extremely bright light).

Which means that this weapon is fully operational. You would down a manned aircraft within seconds. And even if the pilot bails out, he will never fly again. Effective...

Except that we've had laser protective goggles for pilots for decades now, and that's not even counting the PLTZ goggles for nuclear flash. Laser blinding isn't a remotely new threat as portable lasers with enough power to burn eyeballs have been around since the late 1960s.

This is what I'm talking about. You can protect the human eye from laser blinding in predictable wavelengths. You cannot protect them from laser burning (including lasers bright enough to simply burn through protective devices and destroy their eyes along with the rest of their head)... but that requires much higher-intensity lasers.

Thing is, Nd-YAG lasers (the ones that run at 1064nm) aren't really that hard to shield against. I know people who work around them, and they have goggles that are very good at blocking out that frequency range.

It would be far from impossible to build pilots' headgear with protective tinting that blocks a few specific frequencies of laser light without too much trouble, so you'd need another damage mechanism aside from relying on being able to blind the pilot.

I take it you haven't exactly seen what happens when you actually focus the KW-MW pulse onto a spot. It's quite fascinating to see that little bright spot of plasma...

And this kind of misses the point.

At high enough intensity a laser can and will start drilling holes in anything. However, the human eye can be blinded at intensities much lower than those needed to burn through solid materials, because it is designed to focus light on the back of the retina. Even direct sunlight can blind you if it is focused through the lens of the eye onto the retina- whereas it presents no threat at all to your exposed skin.

Laser blinding weapons can be shielded against easily enough; the technology to do that already exists. The technology to shield against a cutting laser, one with a continuous power in the kW or MW range and a spot size small enough to bring the intensity up into the megawatts per square meter range? That you can't do.

Now, correct me if I am mistaken, but in real life targeting lasers do not perform as cutting lasers. Thus, they may well be bright enough to blind, but not bright enough to drill holes in materials... at which point you don't get little bright spots of plasma that chew through the goggles as merrily as they'd chew through anything else.

There's an intermediate range, I'm sure, of lasers bright enough not to cause significant damage to ordinary surfaces but bright enough to damage the eye even through protective goggles. But the mere fact that a laser is in the kilowatt range does not mean it can be used for this purpose.