Got a tip for Noah?
SEND IT!
(Guaranteed Confidential)
Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Bomb Squad
Cammo Green
Chem-Bio
Cloak and Dagger
Comms
Cops and Robbers
Data Diving
Dissent Tech
Drones
Eat My Dust
Eye on China
FCS Watch
FOS Files
Gadgets and Gear
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
Info War
Iraq Diary
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Net-Centric
Nukes
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Space
Strategery
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
War Update
You can run...

See all Archives
Related Links
News and Intel
Military.com News
Aviation Week
Natl Defense Mag
Strategy Page
Global Security Newswire
Soldiers for the Truth
Security News
Defense Review
Fed Comp Week

Security Sources
GlobalSecurity.Org
Fed Am Sci
CSIS
Ctr for Defense Info
Defense & Natl Interest
Instit for Sci & Intl Secy
Secrecy News
POGO
Cryptome
The Memory Hole
Natl Security Archive

Geeks and Mad Scientists
Slashdot
Wired News
Security Focus
The Register
Gizmodo
Geek Press
Robots.Net
Cosmic Log
Space Daily
New Scientist
TechCentralStation
Engadget
Space.Com
Technology Review
Gyre
Near Near Future
Fed Dev Blog

Bloggers and Buddies
Phil Carter
Global Guerillas
Jeffrey Lewis
Milblogging
OPFOR
Laura Rozen
Larisa Alexandrovna
Juan Cole
Ryan Singel
Josh Marshall
Cursor
Boing Boing
InstaPundit
Winds of Change
Tapped
TalkLeft
Brad DeLong
Mountain Runner
Gene Healy
Clive Thompson
Greg Djerejian
Jeff Quinton
Workbench
Electrolite
Jim Henley
War in Context
Kathryn Cramer
Wash Park Prophet
Blogs of War
Tom Shachtman

Official Dispatches
DARPA
AF Research Lab
Marine War Lab
Soldier Systems Ctr
Naval Research
Army Research Lab
UK Def Sci Lab
NASA News
DoJ Cybercrime

Military Network
Military Benefits
Veteran Employment
GI Bill Express
Personnel Locator
Free ASVAB
The Few
Fred's Place
Army Insider
Navy Insider
Air Force Insider
Marine Corps Insider
Coast Guard Insider



Edited by Noah Shachtman | Contact

Laser Jet's Toxic Interior

It turns out those scary Air Force documents are good for something other than guiding firefighters and triggering panicked headlines. They also show just how hard it would be to actually make a laser-firing 747 work.

abl_patch.jpgThe $7.3 billion Airborne Laser is the Air Force's attempt to refit a commercial 747 jet with a chemical-powered laser. But it hasn't been easy -- missed deadlines, bloated budgets, you name it.

One of the bigger problems is the chemicals needed to start the laser chain-reaction aren't exactly the most stable and healthiest things to have around: 1,000 pounds of chlorine, 1,000 pounds of ammonia, 12,000 pounds of hydrogen peroxide, 220 gallons of sulphuric acid.

They're so toxic, in fact, that the Air Force documents recommend that "all personnel must be [in the] forward [part of the plane] "during taxi, takeoff, and landing." Going to the Airborne Laser's aft "in flight is only allowed during a declared emergency, and then only for the absolute minimum duration, in Level A hazmat suit."

Now, some folks out there have been pushing the Airborne Laser, hard. They really dig the idea of energy weapons, and want to see one built, finally, after decades of promising.

I think it's safe to say that anyone visiting this site has a soft spot for ray guns. But a weapon with limited range, a handful of shots, in-flight maintenance costs of $92,000 per hour, and enough chemicals that the crew has to wear hazmat suits to stay aboard? I'd rather wait for my energy weapons, thank you very much.

(Big ups: Michael)

Latest Comments

Why waste anymore time with this toxic avenger waiting to happen, when the H.A.A.R.P. project in Alaska can do it all. WITHOUT a toxic spill. And don't forget, not only can it microwave the nosecone radar off any and all bogeys in flight, it can induce an earthquake, or hurricane on the launch platform as well. Read the book, Angels Don't Play This H.A.A.R.P.

Posted by: Vaughn at December 23, 2006 8:11 PM


I agree... ABL's laser technology is a dead end, and will be supplanted in a few years by some sort of solid state, OLED, or similar electricity-based laser.

BUT... in the meantime, ABL serves as a good testbed for all of the *other* things that have to be developed, like the optics, fc, battle management, sensors, heat/waste management, and everything else that goes into flying a giant laser cannon.

I still suspect the reason the AF classifies it as a demonstrator is because they believe that there will eventually be production models armed with an entirely different laser.

Posted by: Big D at April 13, 2006 11:15 PM


JB just about nails my sentiment.

Posted by: Moose at April 12, 2006 4:32 PM


I can't see how it would even be remotely legal to operate such a vehicle in American airspace, let alone through the airspaces of any other sensible country.

Is there any aspect of this system that wouldn't be carried out better by a series of multiply redundant land based versions?

Posted by: Marshall at April 12, 2006 3:35 PM


Still seems worth it as a prototype. Chemical spills in the desert and ocean aren't all that bad. How much oil gets spilled there every day?

We have to do the R&D on all the components to keep our lead. If it means we make do with a nasty chemical laser to make the prototype work, so be it.

Even with a few shots it has value. How many long range missiles does North Korea have? What's the PR value of knocking a NK missile out of the air the next time they try to fly one over Japan?

Posted by: JB at April 12, 2006 12:18 PM


» View All 7 Comments

» Post a Comment