Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/18/boeing_laser_avenger_/
Boeing trumpets 'relevant battlefield laser' raygun
Copes easily with aggressive sitting ducks, barrels of fish
Posted in Science, 18th October 2007 13:40 GMT
Free whitepaper – Dell PowerEdge servers product guide
Monster US arms'n'aerospace outfit Boeing is pleased as punch this week to announce (http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/md/avenger/news/2007/q4/071015a_nr.html) that it has "successfully demonstrated" its new Humvee-mounted raygun, the Laser Avenger - intended to prove "that directed energy weapons are relevant to today's battlefield, and ready to be fielded".
Holy crap, one might think. Energy weapons, relevant to today's battlefield, ready to go?
That's got to be something pretty exciting - maybe a handheld blaster rifle, better in some ways than an AK47. Or, more prosaically but very usefully, a lightning-fast beam which could zap salvos of Katyusha rockets or mortar bombs out of the air - very welcome in the constantly-harassed fortified bases of Iraq or Afghanistan.
Well, no, actually. What we've got here is a gyrostabilised automatic turret from Boeing's existing Avenger air-defence system. Avenger normally packs Stinger missiles and/or a .50-cal heavy machine gun, but this year Boeing has fitted it out with a 1 kilowatt solid state laser.
Just what use this might be isn't immediately clear, though Boeing reckons Laser Avenger would be a great way of clearing unexploded ordnance (UXO) or perhaps terrorist/insurgent bombs (Improvised Explosive Devices, or IEDs) out of the way. It seems you can shine the raygun at such things, and after a while they explode.
Boeing said: "During laser firings [last month] the Laser Avenger engaged and destroyed five targets representing IED and UXO threats... at ranges that allowed the system to be operated at safe distances from the target."
Well, that is impressive. Although you can do the same job - probably quicker - with a suitable rifle (http://www.army.mod.uk/news/army_news_archive/year_2003/eod_rifle.htm), actually: probably with less chance of detonating the explosives. And you don't need a whole Hummer-load of gear in that scenario.
So what else can Laser Avenger do? Apart from maybe light a cigar?
Ahem. "During the test, the system also took a step toward demonstrating a counter-unmanned aerial vehicle capability by destroying two small unmanned aerial vehicles that were stationary on the ground."
Hmm. One can typically destroy a small unmanned aerial vehicle, if stationary on the ground, with nothing more technically sophisticated than a length of pipe. This isn't exactly amazing stuff.
But Boeing reckons Laser Avenger "could be upgraded... to destroy other kinds of targets, including low-flying unmanned aerial vehicles."
Which would be dandy if anyone on "today's battlefield" - apart from the USA and its friends - was using flying robots. Some people are puzzled by this lack of interest by the Taliban, Iraqi insurgents and such in small drone aircraft, and expect them to get in on the game soon. There are certain applications they might find useful; for instance, small cheap GPS-guided jobs could act as mini cruise missiles against US and allied bases.
But this sort of thing could be dealt with in easier ways than laser-cannon defences. Even the most basic aerobot relies on the electromagnetic spectrum in some way, if only to receive GPS transmissions. A little bit of localised jamming or spoofing of the civil GPS signal (nothing so heavy-handed as fooling with the satellites would be required) and the jihadi flying-bomb guys will be out of luck. Such measures are widely believed to be available already, in fact.
Any more sophisticated unmanned aircraft would need an actual communications link of some sort, and that kind of thing makes Western electronic-warfare guys very happy indeed. A system of that nature would most probably be a death warrant for its operator, in addition to having almost zero chance of successfully achieving anything.
So perhaps the non-appearance of improvised cruise missiles isn't so surprising. And perhaps Boeing's rather feeble, rather heavy raygun isn't, in fact, very relevant to today's battlefield after all. The old gag about lasers being "a solution in search of a problem" comes to mind here.
All of which might explain why the company had to pay for Laser Avenger's development themselves, rather than getting any Pentagon seed money. ®