Skip to comments.Air Force to begin testing drone-fired lasers over North Dakota
Posted on 07/21/2012 2:37:17 PM PDT by TribalPrincess2U
On July 26, the U.S. Air National Guard will get the green light to begin firing lasers from unmanned attack drones in a vast swath of skies over North Dakota, despite the concerns of local commercial pilots. At the Devils Lake home of the North Dakota Army National Guard, pilots train on MQ-1 Predator drones -- the most prevalent unmanned attack
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The Empire Strikes Back. So sad it’s gotten this far.
The Empire Strikes Back. So sad it’s gotten this far.
North Dakota? Oil industry? Why not fly them over Chicago and have “accidents”?
Don’t worry. They will only be lasering low level domestic terrorists. Oh yeh, I forgot thats us.
Ain’t no big deal. All of us have been burned by the government before.
From Krauthammer :
Im going to go hard left on you here, Im going ACLU. I dont want regulations, I dont want restrictions, I want a ban on this. Drones are instruments of war. The Founders had a great aversion to any instruments of war, the use of the military inside even the United States. It didnt like standing armies, it has all kinds of statutes of using the army in the country.
A drone is a high-tech version of an old army and a musket. It ought to be used in Somalia to hunt bad guys but not in America. I dont want to see it hovering over anybodys home. Yes, you can say we have satellites, weve got Google Street View and London has a camera on every street corner but thats not an excuse to cave in on everything else and accept a society where youre always under being watched by the government. This is not what we want.
I would say that you ban it under all circumstances and I would predict, Im not encouraging, but I an predicting that the first guy who uses a Second Amendment weapon to bring a drone down thats been hovering over his house is going to be a folk hero in this country.
Fer sure a martyr.
From the article:
“The lasers arent intended as weapons...they are targeting lasers fixed on a spot on the ground, which can be used to steer other explosives to a target.”
I use lasers at work and at home; it ain’t no big deal.
Very misleading article from Fox. The lasers are not weapons. They are used for targeting. And all the training will be done within a military base.
North Dakota? Oil industry?That was my first thought. They HATE the oil industry.
A citizen can be thrown in prison for pointing a pocket laser pen at a plane, but a military laser in the sky, what can possibly go wrong. It just fades away after a few hundred miles I am sure.
Well, that makes all right, then...
just disguise yourself as a Muslim, you’ll be safe from this government
Let’s link them all together and call it Skynet.
What’s the big deal. The air force has had troops on the ground doing the targeting for decades. They now have the ability to laze targets beyond the reach and harms way for ground special ops guys.
This is a great step forward.
These articles and the reaction to them are an embarassing example of ill-informed panic.
But they are DRONES!!!!!!!!! (Cue horror film music).
I guess there are a lot of FReepers that don’t want the military to be able to train for their job.
I could run our dog all over the county with one of these!
They’re training to use them on us, they just don’t know that yet.
The lasers arent intended as weapons...they are targeting lasers fixed on a spot on the ground, which can be used to steer other explosives to a target.
Right, so the planes used to deliver the explosives aren’t weapons, either.
Yes. You need to break out of your cold war mindset.
Oh, did James Holmes have a drone? I missed that part of the story.
Secretary of Defense Gates said that "I don't know anybody at the Department of Defense, Mr. Tiahrt, who thinks that this program should, or would, ever be operationally deployed. The reality is that you would need a laser something like 20 to 30 times more powerful than the chemical laser in the plane right now to be able to get any distance from the launch site to fire."Good thing the Navy is getting good at shooting down missiles the old fashioned way.
"So, right now the ABL would have to orbit inside the borders of Iran in order to be able to try and use its laser to shoot down that missile in the boost phase. And if you were to operationalize this you would be looking at 10 to 20 747s, at a billion and a half dollars apiece, and $100 million a year to operate. And there's nobody in uniform that I know who believes that this is a workable concept."
The Air Force did not request further funds for the Airborne Laser for 2010; Air Force Chief Schwartz has said that the system "does not reflect something that is operationally viable." In December 2011, it was reported that the project was to be ended after 16 years of development and a cost of over $5 billion.
For use against Muslims or Tea Partiers?
RE: For use against Muslims or Tea Partiers?
Wired magazine had a big article about people developing and flying their own drones in the last two or three issues. Here, I found it:
I would say that would be the way to take one down, not with a rifle. Just sayin’ . . .
Good for the military. Some of the hobbyists / would-be-commercial users *are* flying drones.
It’s a hair splitting thing that primarily serves obfuscation in the discussion.
What could possibly go wrong?
Not a big thing. Why? Think about it. Whether its the military, home land security, the fbi, your local sheriffs office, all of these people have family. You can easily find out who, and where they are located. For example, if my neighbor has a son in the military, or the fbi, I can find that out.
If for example, someone comes to my door, and wants to collect the penalty/tax for 0bamacare, then I invite them in. Same with the secret service or fbi.
Then I learn who sent them and their location. Sure, it will get messy, but then I go up their chain of command. Eventually, they all come over to our side or die...or I do.
So sad, that doesn't happen anymore.
I would say that would be the way to take one down, not with a rifle. Just sayin . . .
You may be right. One thing’s for sure, CWII will be fought in the sky.
Really! My daughter lives in ND.
You evidently didn’t read my post either.
I said a James Holmes TYPE.
Aurora Shooter exhibits classic schizophrenia pattern.
Get it now?
What’s ill-informed panic?
Sick people in the know, running around in a panic?
Incorrect. While true we were able to get only about half the design power out of the test vehicle's COIL in ABL, we could easily (with a straightforward redesign and the knowledge we have now) get that power up 2 to 3 times it's current levels. That would be MORE than enough to suppress all ballistic missile activity in a theater the size of Iran 24 hours a day with a fleet of 7-10 ABLs (depending on the assumptions you make regarding reliability, on station availability, etc).
ABL’s range is only weakly tied to laser power. It's range is a much stronger function of the adaptive optics system which could be enhanced to significantly increase lethal range from the current test bird. If that quote from Gates is accurate, he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.
On the other hand, I also am a skeptic about the operational viability of ABL, but for a host of logistics and maintenance reasons unrelated to the performance of the laser weapon itself. Oh, and there were many of us in uniform far more informed than him that felt the system could be developed into a viable operational platform. Give us one year's overrun in the F-22 program, and we could have cleared the skies. It's all a matter of priorities.
No, because it make no sense.