• On MovieTome: TRANSFORMERS 2 SPOILERS!
August 23, 2008 1:41 PM PDT

Laser weapons: A distant target

Posted by Jonathan Skillings
  • Print

Laser technology may yet yield the weapons of the not-so-distant future, but the future is certainly not now.

For the moment, it's all R&D business as usual. Earlier this week, both Boeing and Northrop Grumman put out statements about their ongoing work on U.S. Army's High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator, or HEL TD. And for Boeing, it was also a chance to crow about a contract win: $36 million to continue its work on a HEL TD design.

HEL TD image

The work on the HEL TD is intended to lead eventually to a truck-mounted laser weapon that could shoot down rockets and artillery shells.

(Credit: Boeing)

With that money, Boeing says it will first finish its design work, and then move on to building and testing a ruggedized beam control system on a heavy-duty truck (specifically, the Army's Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck). The defense contractor finished the preliminary design of the beam control system earlier this summer. Boeing also plans to develop the systems-engineering requirements for the complete HEL TD laser weapon system.

Northrop Grumman, for its part, this week said that it has completed all preliminary design review requirements for a rugged beam control subsystem for the HEL TD.

Testing of the beam control systems, with low-power lasers, is expected to take place somewhere around 2010.

Eventually, the HEL TD work will be joined up with the work being done separately on a high-energy solid-state laser--the namesake element of the laser weapon system. The SSL is expected to be in the 100-kilowatt class.

But the lead times are long on projects like this. "Due to resource constraints, we are targeting somewhere in 2016 time frame for a limited deployable system," said Bill Gnacek, HEL TD program manager for the U.S. Army.

The laser weapons platform that emerges from the HEL TD program is intended to target rockets, artillery shells, and mortar rounds.

Boeing is also working on a similar project called the Laser Avenger--a Humvee-mounted laser weapon system that would direct its light beam at more Earth-bound targets such as roadside bombs and other unexploded ordnance. The Laser Avenger, a variation on the existing, Stinger-missile-equipped Avenger air defense system, is internally funded by Boeing.

August has been something of a landmark occasion for Boeing and its laser weapons projects, which have been notable for their slow progress. Earlier this month, the company said it had done the first ground test of the entire weapon system in its Airborne Tactical Laser aircraft, which fired its high-energy chemical laser through its beam control system. Boeing expects to fire the laser in flight at a ground target before the end of this year.

Jonathan Skillings is managing editor of CNET News, based in the Boston bureau. He's been with CNET since 2000, after a decade in tech journalism at the IDG News Service, PC Week, and an AS/400 magazine. He's also been a soldier and a schoolteacher. E-mail Jon.
Recent posts from Cutting Edge
Ta ta, Tesla
A longer delay for the Large Hadron Collider
Household bot makes theatrical debut
'Star Wars'-like light syringe could target cancer
Video: A jet-pack flight over a Colorado gorge
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 14 comments
by expatincebu August 23, 2008 4:36 PM PDT
So nice, we keep spending billions to develop new and better ways to kill people. Meanwhile the countries infrastructure is failing, any money to develop clean energy is called socialism, and the nation is trillions in debt and essentially bankrupt.
Reply to this comment
by Commander_Spock August 24, 2008 2:25 PM PDT
Re: "the nation is trillions in debt and essentially bankrupt..." Not necessarily so when it comes to "i-d-e-a-s" though! Besides, of what use is a country going to be to its people if they cannot defend it? Duh! Do you remember these words: "Ask Not What (Your Country) America Can Do For You, But What You Can Do For (Your Country) America"?
by xZero2007x August 23, 2008 8:12 PM PDT
expatincebu: Very funny and true. Might want to check your spelling and grammar though. lol. It's weird, but we haven't really had any periods of peace yet, so it's only expected to continue developing weapons technologies. The country's infrastructure failing thing is more in line with our personal money habits in my opinion. Well, that and our constant need to have our car and AC running while expecting it to be cheap. Japan's been paying these prices for a while, and we haven't heard them complaining about it. But clean energy and our debt to ourselves are valid issues. I'd imagine that if we didn't continue projects like these, it'd affect our market in some indirect way, but at the same time, I agree that the money could go to another part of the market to improve on something else.
Reply to this comment
by jeepwonder August 23, 2008 8:30 PM PDT
Why assume because it's military that it won't be useful for civilian use later? In the medical field for one.
A lot of advances have been funded for military purposes and then bled over into other applications. I for one, would love to see this in a smaller scale for zapping mosquitos on my back porch! I had a laser procedure done ten years ago (septioplasty) and it was much quicker to heal and less bleeding that with a scalpel. I for one am glad for advances in controlling and using this kind of light beam.
Reply to this comment
by ortzinator August 23, 2008 9:09 PM PDT
New ways of killing people are usually better than the old ways. For example, accurately guided bombs versus dummy bombs that produce more collateral damage. And I agree with xZero2007x. Stop blaming the government.
Reply to this comment
by litesong August 23, 2008 11:42 PM PDT
When our nighttime astronomy sessions were temporarily clouded out, we would sight in on cars 10 miles away. We would remove the eyepieces & flash powerful lights down the optical tubes. The mirrors would align the light beam & we could illuminate cars 10 miles away with the flashes. If gang members ever came in possession of one the military's optical weapons, it would be death for people 10 miles away.
by Rants&Raves August 23, 2008 9:49 PM PDT
How about investing a fraction of military spending on better, more intelligent, diplomacy ? Diplomats these days are seldom career relationists; they are honorific roles given to people at the trailing end of their careers. We need smarter diplomacy, backed by better analysis, and a more refined foreign policy.

And that would all cost a hell of a lot less than a single B-1B.
Reply to this comment
by willdryden August 25, 2008 9:56 AM PDT
Sometimes you just can't talk someone into being reasonable. There are times when force is the only way.
by Rants&Raves August 26, 2008 7:54 AM PDT
Diplomacy isn't about "talking people into being reasonable". It is playing chess and winning, well before the end. When you put a soldier on the ground, you lost that game already or didn't value her life enough to play it with all you had.
by August 23, 2008 10:28 PM PDT
Priorities are the name of the game in government. Who else do you blame when the economy is failing, the budget isn't balanced, people are suffering and money is being spent on non-essentials while essentials are quintessential? Granted, this is a worthy technology and in the grand scheme of the budget $36 million is a tiny slice of the pie. Where our government needs to focus its efforts in the military spending arena is the area of no-bid contracts that seem to be the favorite of this administration in particular. Billions of dollars are being spent on fraudulent billing for goods and services that were never received. Many of these dubious billed services are provided by private paramilitary groups and contractors that are performing duties that are traditionally borne by the military itself and still should be. First you should be on the phone to your congressman complaining about the fact that no one will stand up and force congress to investigate the company that has infamous ties to Vice President Cheney and companies like it that are pulling in record profits illegally with impunity. (Sen. Byron Dorgan has intorduced numerous efforts to investigate this and somehow the effort is always curtailed). Second, you should register to vote people out of office who support pork barrel spending and oppose clean energy incentives and research. Third, force congress to pass a law limiting the amount of speculation on a single barrel of oil before it reaches the pumps. (Sometimes a barrel of oil can be bought and sold myriad times before it ever reaches someone who can actually do something producttive with it and this serves to drive the price up immensely just for the benefit of the speculator.) We are the people and this is our government, or at least is once was until we became complacent and let self serving individuals corrupt the ranks of our representatives. Do YOUR civic duty and form a consensus as a people and force your leaders to reflect your views in their actions.
Reply to this comment
by Commander_Spock August 24, 2008 2:40 PM PDT
Re: "Third, force congress to pass a law limiting the amount of speculation on a single barrel of oil before it reaches the pumps. (Sometimes a barrel of oil can be bought and sold myriad times before it ever reaches someone who can actually do something producttive with it and this serves to drive the price up immensely just for the benefit of the speculator.)... What is the "production cost" of "a barrel of oil" anyway? Show us the M-A-T-H-S!
by marvinsfane August 24, 2008 9:22 PM PDT
A least we don't have to spend too much for a Laser Defence System. There is at least one in every home - a mirror. And surely every missle and shell to be produced will now be polished to a high luster, aluminium or something similar. How about deflecting the laser back to the point of origin and knocking out the Laser weapon itself. Defence becomes Offence!
Reply to this comment
by willdryden August 25, 2008 9:58 AM PDT
The article is slightly behind the times. There was an airborne system deployed in 1992 and the system they are describing was deployed in 2001.
Reply to this comment
by shevaberg August 25, 2008 6:52 PM PDT
I wondering how much China and the other countries of the world are spending to kill us....
At least the government is trying to do something about it...
Reply to this comment
advertisement

In the news now

A tech veteran responds to the recession

LogLogic's Patricia Sueltz heard a clear message about the economy from investors, but she already knows a thing or two about navigating through tough times.


Obama's AG pick on privacy

Eric Holder has criticized the warrantless wiretapping program, but his views on other online policies may not be that far from those of the Bush administration.


About Cutting Edge

Keep up-to-date on cutting-edge research and what's new in a wide range of areas from robotics, space ventures and general science to automobile design and solar energy.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Cutting Edge topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right