Skip to comments.What’s Next for Airborne Laser?
Posted on 04/02/2010 10:03:23 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
The ABL did everything it was supposed to do. Now, the Pentagon wants to call it quits. On the night of Feb. 11, off the coast of Southern California, the Missile Defense Agency scored a major achievement by destroying a liquid-fueled ballistic missile target in flight. The important part was that it did so using a laser weapon carried onboard a Boeing 747-400 aircraft.
This milestone event constituted the first publicly announced test success for the Airborne Laser (ABL). However, the success was actually the second of its kind within an eight-day period. On Feb. 3, the ABL aircraft was used to destroy a solid-fueled missile during its boost phase. This test was not announced until ABL was successfully used against the liquid-fueled (Scud-type) target a little more than a week later.
The Boeing-led ABL team won the contract for the multibillion-dollar program nearly 14 years ago. Februarys test success was the key event toward which the program had been building for years.
However, the successes probably came years too late for a program that was once a top missile defense priority. When the Obama Administration handed Congress its defense budget for Fiscal 2011, Pentagon officials announced that the Airborne Laser would be shifted out of MDA, which has managed the program since 2002. ABL will be given to the director of defense research and engineering for use as a directed energy test bed.
(Excerpt) Read more at airforce-magazine.com ...
I have a hedge that needs trimming....
We win our wars in our factories and battle fields, and lose them in Washington.
It was discontinued. But there are still voices who still support it
This is a sign that the Obama Regime is not good for our national security.
We should sell it to Israel as they will have the will to use it to protect their country from Iranian missiles.
What rationale does the Pentagon give for the cancellation? Enormous cost? Inadequate range? Unworkable operational concept? Failure to meet technical specifications?