Article

2013-04-09 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Navy Deploying Laser Weapon Prototype Near Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2013-04-09 00:00|| || Front Page|| [9 views ] Top

#1 Over to IRAN once the testing is complete in Guam???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2013-04-09 00:12|| 2013-04-09 00:12|| Front Page Top

#2 The laser weapon also has a limitless supply of ammunition pulses of high energy so long as the ship can generate electricity.

OK, so call me skeptical; with the shift in design philosophy away from carbon based fuels to electricity to power the entire damn ship, isn't this afterthought likely to impact other functions or what happens when all the powder based guns are pulled off and these lasers are put in place? i see overloads being not rare occurences. and if an ordnance elevator breaks down, manpower can move the ordnance to the guns, its really hard to carry a bucket of volts for this thing.
And lastly, please tell me Boeing isn't involved with this.although they could get us to the failure and fire state sooner.

Posted by USN, Ret. 2013-04-09 00:46|| 2013-04-09 00:46|| Front Page Top

#3 The laser weapon also has a "limitless supply of ammunition"

Appears to be an administration prerequisite these days.

Posted by Besoeker 2013-04-09 06:38|| 2013-04-09 06:38|| Front Page Top

#4 You made me smile, USN Ret. I started thinking of the bridge of the Starship Enterprise with all the circuit breakers popping, sparks flying, and people hurtling about during an attack. We might get there sooner than we think!

Posted by Steve White 2013-04-09 07:24|| 2013-04-09 07:24|| Front Page Top

#5 the EPA will crack down and demand only fluorescent laser bulbs

Posted by Frank G 2013-04-09 07:35|| 2013-04-09 07:35|| Front Page Top

#6 I'm pretty sure that shooting those curly-fried light bulbs at the enemy would violate the Geneva Conventions - chemical weapons of mass destruction, you know.

Posted by Glenmore 2013-04-09 07:53|| 2013-04-09 07:53|| Front Page Top

#7 The Navy released video and still images of the laser weapon burning through a drone during a test firing.

Is it like the Iran pictures of multiple missile launches?

i see overloads being not rare occurrences.

I want to see the battery needed to jump start that sucker. Pulling a CVN along side, dead in the water, would make a very tempting big target. ;)

Posted by Procopius2k 2013-04-09 08:21|| 2013-04-09 08:21|| Front Page Top

#8 Probably something in the range of the GeneraciX-800.

Posted by Waldemar Turkeyneck6888 2013-04-09 09:08|| 2013-04-09 09:08|| Front Page Top

#9 I don't think the lasers are going to replace the guns and missiles. They look more like point defense syzems, like the current Phalanx CIWS.

The main guns will eventually be replaced with rail guns. Those will draw a massive amount of power.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2013-04-09 09:47|| 2013-04-09 09:47|| Front Page Top

#10 hard to think about laser weapons without think of Dr Evil

Posted by lord garth 2013-04-09 09:56|| 2013-04-09 09:56|| Front Page Top

#11 The reactor on the Ford will generate 50% more power than the Nimitz class. While some of this will go to the catapults and radars, I suspect there's amperage to spare for whatever weapons systems evolve. More reason to doubt the recent rash of "the carrier is obsolete" articles.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2013-04-09 11:31|| 2013-04-09 11:31|| Front Page Top

#12 BWEW BWEW!

Posted by newc 2013-04-09 13:21|| 2013-04-09 13:21|| Front Page Top

#13 Thanks Steve, for some reason, Seaman Scottie running amok on the bridge never crossed my mind.
Nimble, yes the reactors will build a lot of power, but it only takes a disrupted circuit (or two) to kill the flow of electrons. and with the Navy's big push to automate many tasks will reduce manning, that means fewer Damage Control parties, or fire teams or just warm bodies to do the dirty crap. think what the Forrestal fire would have done if the manp0wer wasn't there to replace the primary teams when they got blown away by the exploding ordnance. Being a participant in the 1988 Nimitz fire, i can tell you that there was nobody not actively engaged in some capacity. fewer men, greater reliance on automation, and you will be looking at some holes in the water where a man of war once rode. ( and that doesn't even invoke shades of HAL 9000, going rogue due to bad 'trons). sorry for the rant, but i do not expect this to end well.

Posted by USN, Ret. 2013-04-09 16:21|| 2013-04-09 16:21|| Front Page Top

#14 The US may have to deploy something since the USN Fifth Fleet may NOT have the USAF as backup due to the Sequester.

* FOX NEWS this AM [PARAPH]> USAF TO GROUND ONE-THIRD OF ITS ACTIVE-DUTY AIRCRAFT DUE TO SEQUESTER-LED BUDGET CUTS.

The FlyBoyz for the same reason also have to reduce their flight-time by 45,000 hours.

On the US NAVY'S part, their highly popular "BLUE ANGELS" have lost the remainder of their season of scheduled events.

MY BAD VIBES AS PER CHINA-VS-JAPAN-VS-DEBT/SEQUESTER-RIDDEN-US CONTINUES THIS AM.

* FYI YONHAP NEWS > SOUTH KOREA SHOULD WEIGN DEPARTURE FROM NPT, LAWMAKER [Rep. Chung Mong-joon] SAYS.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2013-04-09 19:42|| 2013-04-09 19:42|| Front Page Top

23:10 USN, Ret.
22:37 trailing wife
22:10 JosephMendiola
21:23 Frank G
21:14 Anguper Hupomosing9418
20:47 CrazyFool
20:11 JosephMendiola
20:04 Deacon Blues
19:42 JosephMendiola
19:32 JosephMendiola
19:08 Bill Clinton
19:07 Bill Clinton
18:14 lord garth
16:50 Elmerert Hupens2660
16:32 Cheddarhead
16:27 Besoeker
16:21 USN, Ret.
16:14 SteveS
16:13 Ebbang Uluque6305
16:10 USN, Ret.
15:55 AlanC
15:53 Shipman
15:31 Pappy
15:12 AlanC