Not a member? Sign Up

Reasons for Joining

    Address your challenges through knowledge sharing with peers from our global network of specialists.

    Benchmark your business initiatives with the who's who in the field.

    Hear from industry pioneers how to maximize ROI in today's challenging economy.

    And best of all It's FREE!
Sign in using your existing
IDGA account
Username or Email:

Sign Up   | Already a member? Sign In
Defense

Airborne Laser Hits Target but Future Still in Doubt

Contributor:  IDGA Editorial Staff
Posted:  03/11/2010  12:00:00 AM EST  |  1

Rate this Article: (5.0 Stars | 1 Vote)

Tags:   Airborne Laser | ALTB | Missile Defense Agency | Robert Gates | Secretary Gates

The Airborne Laser Testbed (ALTB) successfully destroyed a ballistic missile off the California coast on the 11th February, but the program still faces an uncertain future. The long-awaited intercept test proved that the modified Boeing 747-400F’s chemical oxygen iodine laser (Coil) can successfully engage ballistic missiles. A week before the successful intercept against a Scud missile-like target, the ALTB shot down a Terrier Black Brant, which is a two-stage sounding rocket that represented a faster and smaller target for its 1MW-class chemical laser and fire control system.

However, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates remains opposed to making the $6 billion Airborne Laser program operational, having last year cancelled a second aircraft and downgraded the effort from operational prototype to test-bed status. The program is now in limbo, as the Department of Defense’s less than $100 million request for the ALTB in fiscal year 2011 is insufficient to preserve the industrial base for such high-energy lasers.

Meanwhile, the office of the DoD’s director for research and engineering is assessing options for missile defenses in the boost and ascent phases. The ALTB is a candidate in the analysis, which will decide the Pentagon’s FY2012 budget request.

The Missile Defense Agency is working on a study computing the lifecycle acquisition cost of an operational system, which would require buying up to seven aircraft.



IDGA Editorial Staff Contributor:   IDGA Editorial Staff

* = required.

Not a member yet? Sign up
User Name:
Password:
You Should Check Out:

1
 Comments
Sign in or Sign up to post a comment
View Profile
  Report Abuse  
Lloyd Rakosnik 03/16/2010 2:56:20 PM EDT

Let me understand this completely. We now have the equipment to shoot down an incoming missile from a hostile country while it remains airborne thus rendering our population safe from ICBM attack. But we will not fund the necessary technical development to make the system operational. So the alternative remains an aging rocket force that can only be used as an offensive weapon and has no true defensive qualities whatsoever. It has massive deterrent qualities and I will concede that this can be construed to be a defensive posture. But the fact remains once their side launches an attack at us our current force can only respond in kind; we cannot stop their warheads from hitting us. However we are now presented with the possibility of actually have a second choice. One different from launching a retaliatory strike and one that stops their attack without the massive loss of property and life built into the current system. We just turned this choice down? Are we nuts?
Replies (0)

Post a Comment
Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Advertisement

Events of Interest
Download Brochure

Please complete the information below to complete your download.

Please note: That all fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.

First Name *
Last Name *
Job Title *
Company Name *
Email Address *
Telephone *
Country *
Where did you hear about us? *

I would like to receive information about sponsorship and exhibition opportunities

Yes, sign me up for the FREE IDGA e-newsletter, including information on FREE Podcasts, Webinars, event discounts and online learning opportunities.

You Might Also Like



Advertisement

Recent Activity