Air Force pushing for ground-based, satellite-killing lasers

In a proposal that would surely bring a tear to the late Ronald Reagan's eye, Air Force officials are attempting to co-opt $5.7 million from the 2007 budget for developing high-energy lasers that could be used to destroy enemy satellites (because, you know, al Qaeda is launching birds left and right). So far a subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee has "shot down" the program, which would build on a 1997 Pentagon study of a two-million-watt laser, although the full committee could reinstate the provision following analysis of the entire bill. While certain military interests have pushed for anti-satellite weapons since the Cold War, concern over the space junk that destroyed sats would create has kept the international community from serious pursuit of any "Star Wars"-like programs. Although we're always keen on new military tech (hey, it gives us something to write about), we're gonna have to side with the Doubting Thomases on this one, because the impending "ROBO-ONE in the Space" satellite is simply too important to risk even a single stray laser strike.

[Blake @ May 3rd 2006 4:30PM]

Considering the most powerful lasers currently in operation are in the fifty kilowatt range (Popular Science 48), it's going to be a long while till we get some multi-megawatt goodness.

[ty @ May 3rd 2006 4:34PM]

Satellites are craze sensitive. They wouldn't have to destroy it outright (although that could be fun) they just need to disable it enough.

[Jim @ May 3rd 2006 4:37PM]

Why don't they just use the lasers to take out the space junk? At least the bigger pieces....

[John @ May 3rd 2006 4:50PM]

Does this make anyone else think of Torchwood?

[d3 @ May 3rd 2006 5:00PM]

They could use the laser from this movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089886/

[XrisTEK @ May 3rd 2006 5:02PM]

Uh, most power laser in the world does petawatt (1.0x10^15 watt) pulses, not kilowatt.

[BK @ May 3rd 2006 5:06PM]

This post has all the making for an Austin Power comment. Any takers?

[Liam Billington @ May 3rd 2006 5:10PM]

Could be mistaken for a imperial hypervelocity gun in star wars empire at war.

[Lyn @ May 3rd 2006 5:18PM]

This is not actually as impossible as it might seem. Firt of all, as ty noted, satellites are among the most sensitive pieces of equipment on the modern battlefield. It's not going to take a lot to heat and deform something that's important (like a reaction-mass storage tank, an antenna, lens assembly, etc). Secondly, the attenuation problems inherent to older carbon-dioxide lasers have largely been solved by using lasers that utilize other substances (iodine, I think). Since there's little iodine in the atmosphere, the wavelengths of laser light don't get absorbed like wavelengths from CO2. Increases the range to somewhere around 800 kilometers. They're set to use one on the Airborne Laser platform launching sometime in the next year or so. May sound cooky, but it's really pretty doable.

[Jvijil @ May 3rd 2006 5:19PM]

if you insist #6"
"Mini Me stop humping the laser!!"

[Tim UF @ May 3rd 2006 5:20PM]

wasnt this a clive cussler novel also? no no it was a clancy novel...

[Dr Evil @ May 3rd 2006 5:23PM]

You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads! Now evidently my cycloptic colleague informs me that that cannot be done. Ah, would you remind me what I pay you people for, honestly? Throw me a bone here! What do we have?

[TIMMAH! @ May 3rd 2006 5:28PM]

Damn #5, you beat me to it. One of my favorite movies of all time (along with Better Off Dead.)

"A really big mirror makes a really big beam!"

"It's not revenge, it's a moral imperative!"

Mitch: "I had a dream last night..."
Chris: "Is it the one where you're on top of a huge pyramid, and there's all these half-naked women all around you throwing little pickles at you?"
Mitch: "No."
Chris: "Why am I the only one who has that dream?"

[Jeremy @ May 3rd 2006 5:31PM]

The modern lightsaber.

[Chris @ May 3rd 2006 5:35PM]

This makes plenty sense. Think how up a creek we (US) would be in a conflict w/o our satilites (GPS, COM, SURV). At one point there was talk of using ground based lasers for missle defense.

Is congress really going to do anything better with $5.7M? Maybe form some committee to research something completely useless?

[zzzzzzzzzz @ May 3rd 2006 5:51PM]

$5.7MM is nothing. We probably spend that in 30 minutes in Iraq...

[Brennan @ May 3rd 2006 5:56PM]

This is great idea. IMHO there should be a lot more defense spending and lot less spending in the other areas that are completely useless and a waste of tax payer dollars. You may say its far-fetched, but you probably would be surprised with some of the technology the air force already has that is not public.

[Jason @ May 3rd 2006 6:07PM]

I've always wanted to bring the Star Wars project back. It can only help our military. Reagan had the right idea; we just didn't have the tech at the time. I think the most realistic implementation of laser weapons is the very near-future anti-missile lasers that will be mounted on the noses of fighter-jets and use satellite data to target incoming projectiles. We'll probably see those within a decade.

[Jason @ May 3rd 2006 6:09PM]

^^ That was info from a Popular Science article a few years back, so I wasn't just blowing off smoke or wishful thinking. The timeframe prediction is from military researchers.

[morcheeba @ May 3rd 2006 6:13PM]

#3: Chances are, you'll break the junk into smaller pieces which become impossible to track.

Also, there's no oxygen in space, so a laser (even with infinite power) would just heat things up and not actually burn them. Unless you hit a hydrazine tank...

[blah @ May 3rd 2006 6:52PM]

phasers are the answer.

Anyways, I'm still with getting space travel much cheaper and just launching all our non-biodegradeable trash towards the sun! woohoo clean up!

just don't do it too much, else we might have a matter shortage here on earth :/

[steve @ May 3rd 2006 7:03PM]

mmmmmmm.........lasers
i say go for it
so the other countries can design it too and we can see who kills the most satellites
that would be fun to watch on tv
and you get extra points if the enemies satellite lands in their country
lol

[blah @ May 3rd 2006 7:16PM]

Am I the only who thinks the military already has mirror satellites in space?

Forget ICBMs, friends

[bliss @ May 3rd 2006 7:25PM]

heavy duty... seems a bit risky...like accidentally beam through a plane or something :P

[Chip @ May 3rd 2006 7:26PM]

> Air Force officials are attempting
> to co-opt $5.7 million from the 2007

$5.7 million? That's not even enough for lunch. Better check your numbers - it should read $5.7 BILLION or more.

[trimbandit @ May 3rd 2006 7:32PM]

I want 5 megawatts by mid May.

[Russ @ May 3rd 2006 8:46PM]

Everyone says our ports are the most vulnerable aspect of our security.

"I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads!"

[Russ @ May 3rd 2006 8:48PM]

...and maybe prarie dogs with frickin laser beams attached to their heads strategically placed on our Mexican border.

[Chris R @ May 3rd 2006 10:17PM]

I think the comment in the article "because, you know, al Qaeda is launching birds left and right" is just a wee bit short sited. Have we lost sight of the fact that while Qaeda is a threat and occupies much of our thinking right now, they are not the only threat. China? Russia? To think we need a force or weapons only to fight the likes of Qaeda is like saying to China or a renewed Russia that we do not consider them a threat. I beg to differ. Moderation in all things, from high tech weapons, a standing army, special ops and reaction forces. The world is not comprised of a singular threat, nor must we set our course on a singular defense. If this laser is a viable option, then why not? Of course, on the personal side - I hope me and my plane are not in the way when they toast any space monkeys.

[darryl @ May 4th 2006 12:53AM]

Are there that many threatening satellites in space, will there be in the future? Currently, it looks to me that only China might have the intention/capability of sending suspect satellites over our heads, if not now, maybe in the near future.

[Thewser @ May 4th 2006 1:24AM]

Now if they were to develop lasers that fired FROM space...well that'd be money well spent.

[MrSatyre @ May 4th 2006 1:14PM]

The Soviets successfully blinded several of our satellites in the late '70s using large-scale gas lasers. It's not particularly difficult to do. Just expensive.

Your friend today may be your enemy tomorrow.

Information is the key to any future conflict, and by eliminating the information gathering tools of future enemies, you gain an almost insurmountable advantage on the battlefield. I'm not talking about simply preventing your enemy from spying on you, but of preventing him from communicating with his troops at land, at sea or in the air.

[Matt @ May 4th 2006 3:43PM]

Wow, whoever wrote the original post is a bit shortsighted. While Al Qaeda sure doesn't have the technology to launch sattelites, the Russians and Chinese do. The odds of either attacking us are a long shot. After all, why would China attack its most important trading partner? However, the Chinese and Russians are launching sattelites for other countries. Most recently, Russia launched Israel's first spy sattelite. While China and Russia haven't done so, they'd probably take Iran's money/oil to launch a bird, which clearly is why our military and intelligence community want to experiment with this tech. It makes plenty of sense -- especially if they plan on going to war with Iran in the next decade.

[Melted.Marsbar @ May 5th 2006 2:55AM]

What if there's a mirror on the satellite and just refects the super-dooper laser back to earth =P