Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: alexander_busek

As it turns out, a mirrored surface is no protection against a high-energy laser. It has been demonstrated in lab tests that the energy transfer is enough to destroy a target.


17 posted on 12/05/2008 2:19:00 AM PST by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: jimtorr
[...] a mirrored surface is no protection against a high-energy laser [...]

It was not my intent to make any "blanket statements." Notice that I said merely that a mirrored surface would reduce the missile's vulnerability - perhaps even enough to allow it to survive, e.g., a "near miss."

It has been demonstrated in lab tests that the energy transfer is enough to destroy a target.

As long as those lab tests included such real-world factors as the atmosphere's intrinsic opacity, possible interposing clouds, the gradual widening of the collimated beam, etc., I will accept that.

Regards,

18 posted on 12/05/2008 2:31:44 AM PST by alexander_busek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: jimtorr
As it turns out, a mirrored surface is no protection against a high-energy laser. It has been demonstrated in lab tests that the energy transfer is enough to destroy a target.

What about chaff?

30 posted on 12/05/2008 5:59:41 AM PST by Theophilus (Abortion: #1 National Security Issue, #1 Economic Issue, #1 Moral Issue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson