Airborne Laser Weapon Fails to Take Down Dummy Nuke in Critical 100-Mile Test Shot

This is hugely disappointing. This system is taking way too long to be completed. I think we should skip our focus from chemical lasers. While powerful, they offer limited shots and reliability. We need to focus on developing FEL's(Free Electron Laser) instead. FEL's are better in every single way to a chemical laser.

Regardless of setbacks, this concept of missile defense is still better than the idiocy of trying to 'hit a bullet with another bullet.'

Ridiculous.

"Welcome! to the Federation Starship SS Buttcrack!!!"

All it takes is a single failed test to endanger a potentially amazing defensive program? Isn't failure expected on the way to success? I hope they don't give up on this just yet.

@pheonix1012

I've personally worked with the SM-3 missile which, I think is what you are referring to when you say "trying to 'hit a bullet with another bullet.'", and let me say it is much more reliable and an overall smarter system than the ABL considering that with this Airborne Laser you have to be in the right place at the right time for it to work. If we are trying to shoot down an ICBM that means it was most likely launched from a hostile nation and since you have to be within 50-100 miles of the missile during its boost phase, that means you are most likely in range of enemy SAMs. Not to mention that the ABL has to take off and get into position during the short window of the boost phase all before it can take action.

In my personal opinion its much easier to sit back in the pacific ocean and knock out the ICBM while its in orbit with a Kinetic Kill Vehicle like the SM-3

@pheonix1012

I've personally worked with the SM-3 missile which, I think is what you are referring to when you say "trying to 'hit a bullet with another bullet.'", and let me say it is much more reliable and an overall smarter system than the ABL considering that with this Airborne Laser you have to be in the right place at the right time for it to work. If we are trying to shoot down an ICBM that means it was most likely launched from a hostile nation and since you have to be within 50-100 miles of the missile during its boost phase, that means you are most likely in range of enemy SAMs. Not to mention that the ABL has to take off and get into position during the short window of the boost phase all before it can take action.

In my personal opinion its much easier to sit back in the pacific ocean and knock out the ICBM while its in orbit with a Kinetic Kill Vehicle like the SM-3

@pheonix1012

I've personally worked with the SM-3 missile which, I think is what you are referring to when you say "trying to 'hit a bullet with another bullet.'", and let me say it is much more reliable and an overall smarter system than the ABL considering that with this Airborne Laser you have to be in the right place at the right time for it to work. If we are trying to shoot down an ICBM that means it was most likely launched from a hostile nation and since you have to be within 50-100 miles of the missile during its boost phase, that means you are most likely in range of enemy SAMs. Not to mention that the ABL has to take off and get into position during the short window of the boost phase all before it can take action.

In my personal opinion its much easier to sit back in the pacific ocean and knock out the ICBM while its in orbit with a Kinetic Kill Vehicle like the SM-3

@pheonix1012

I've personally worked with the SM-3 missile which, I think is what you are referring to when you say "trying to 'hit a bullet with another bullet.'", and let me say it is much more reliable and an overall smarter system than the ABL considering that with this Airborne Laser you have to be in the right place at the right time for it to work. If we are trying to shoot down an ICBM that means it was most likely launched from a hostile nation and since you have to be within 50-100 miles of the missile during its boost phase, that means you are most likely in range of enemy SAMs. Not to mention that the ABL has to take off and get into position during the short window of the boost phase all before it can take action.

In my personal opinion its much easier to sit back in the pacific ocean and knock out the ICBM while its in orbit with a Kinetic Kill Vehicle like the SM-3

@pheonix1012

I've personally worked with the SM-3 missile which, I think is what you are referring to when you say "trying to 'hit a bullet with another bullet.'", and let me say it is much more reliable and an overall smarter system than the ABL considering that with this Airborne Laser you have to be in the right place at the right time for it to work. If we are trying to shoot down an ICBM that means it was most likely launched from a hostile nation and since you have to be within 50-100 miles of the missile during its boost phase, that means you are most likely in range of enemy SAMs. Not to mention that the ABL has to take off and get into position during the short window of the boost phase all before it can take action.

In my personal opinion its much easier to sit back in the pacific ocean and knock out the ICBM while its in orbit with a Kinetic Kill Vehicle like the SM-3

@pheonix1012

I've personally worked with the SM-3 missile which, I think is what you are referring to when you say "trying to 'hit a bullet with another bullet.'", and let me say it is much more reliable and an overall smarter system than the ABL considering that with this Airborne Laser you have to be in the right place at the right time for it to work. If we are trying to shoot down an ICBM that means it was most likely launched from a hostile nation and since you have to be within 50-100 miles of the missile during its boost phase, that means you are most likely in range of enemy SAMs. Not to mention that the ABL has to take off and get into position during the short window of the boost phase all before it can take action.

In my personal opinion its much easier to sit back in the pacific ocean and knock out the ICBM while its in orbit with a Kinetic Kill Vehicle like the SM-3

Times have certainly changed since Thomas Edison tried over 7,000 different materials in his quest for a lightbulb filament. I certainly hope the (pardon the expression) powers that be don't cancel the program. I'm sure they can work out the clitches. Ultimately, it will surpass SM-3 capabilities.

FAIL; Box it up and ship it to me, ill take good care of it. Better send some fuel too.

Solid state lasers are the way to go.

Did they remember to take into account the additional curvature of the earth @ the increased distance? Perhaps a failsafe stopped the laser from possibly hitting a ground (or near ground) object. Just a little postulating here.

Naah, they hit a bird while tracking the missile. this is where all our tax went... SIGH!! why don't we just make a geosynchronous satellite armed with EMP warheads. that should work!!

I agree @umdstudent - SM-3 FTW. Plus more than 1 can be fired at the same target.

Until they can figure out how to hit MULTIPLE targets from THOUSANDS of miles away (which is not possible with this system) it will never be as good as the SM-3 system.

@umdstudent
you are the first to make 6 posts in a row all with the same message, congratulations! A sextuple post!

I'm sorry but should we be telling everyone in the world that our missile defense laser did'nt work?

"In science one tries to tell people, in such a way as to be understood by everyone, something that no one ever knew before.".. Paul Dirac

How about using all this money to feed the hungry in Africa and all over the world. Instead these stupid apes are building bigger weapons to over compinsate for something.

@ boka

Seriously dude, stfu. If you care about Africa and feeding people then sell your damn house and give the proceeds to them for food.

Boka,

We already spend boat loads of money to feed Africa and every where else people are in need.

Back on topic, This is a sad set back, but a lot of very successful weapon systems have had long and difficult development periods. This program should continue, even if the intended function never works right the knowledge gained will be useful else were. I do not think it is fair to directly compare this system to the SM3, they have different mission profiles, and could work together quite well as part parts of a larger defense network.

@Boka

why should we waste any more money? it all goes to corrupted leaders who keep it for themselves, so doing something that was doomed from the start in the name of progress is better than throwing money away. Look at Haiti.All that relief effort got almost nowhere. look at Iraq and Afghanistan. OVER 7 BILLION wasted each MONTH? No wonder The US has a s**tty economy, or, my bad, NO economy anymore. How can we call others 3rd world when we can't even support our failing nation? WE HAVE A F**KING DRAFT PROGRAM FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! Now if I know anything its that all this money could be used to rebuild this cesspool and even a failed laser test is an advancement, so shut up and look around! I'll bet almost nobody you know will go on do get a PHD or even a bachelors degree, instead working at McDonalds and living in an apartment for $10 a month. Oh and while some may consider this flaming I'm just trying to state a point here because hey, freedom of speech.

Boka's obviously a moronic child, best to ignore the hypocritical guilt trip trolls like him.

Too bad about the laser though. More testing needed I guess.