Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing YAL-1 Airborne Laser  
User currently offlinetitanmiller From United States of America, joined May 2006, 89 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 8559 times:

I was just thinking about the ABL program when I realized that it seems like an awful lot of money to spend when the countermeasure is to simply strip the paint off missiles and polish the aluminum to a mirror finish. I'm sure that the engineers though of this.

16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8522 times:

Quoting titanmiller (Thread starter):
it seems like an awful lot of money to spend

You can't put a price on homeland security. I believe that laser technology is the future and should be invested in accordingly.


User currently offlinelegs From Australia, joined Jun 2006, 239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8521 times:

Quoting titanmiller (Thread starter):
simply strip the paint off missiles and polish the aluminum

Simply polishing the missile skin isn't enough to defeat a very high powered laser like the YAL-1A. Even at what appears to be a mirror finish, it is an imperfect mirror at a microscopic level, and will continue to absorb some of the laser energy, eventually to the point where structural integrity is compromised.

Had it been this easy to defend against, I guarantee that the money would not have been spent in development. Some very smart people worked on the ABL project.

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 1):
laser technology is the future

I'm all for development for the sake of development, and I agree laser tech will play a big part in the future battlefield (and elsewhere). However, I'm not quite so sure about chemically pumped lasers, like the COIL in the YAL-1A.

[Edited 2011-12-11 20:19:46]

User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2093 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 8385 times:

The only way to keep that polish finish is to use Clad aluminum. Even then you would probably have to keep polishing it periodically to keep it from oxidizing. Maybe someone at AA can clue us in.

Clad aluminum would add extra weight to the missile and might reduce range.

Besides, I don't know if any one uses aluminum skins any more for the boost stage of the missile. Graphite epoxy would be my guess as the material of choice.

bikerthai



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineSP90 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 388 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 6538 times:

Looks l like the ABL test plane is heading to the boneyard.

http://www.mda.mil/news/12news0004.html


User currently offlinebennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7525 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6231 times:

You could always use aluminium baking foil,  

The extra weight would be limited and some protection gained.


User currently offlinespeedygonzales From Norway, joined Sep 2007, 727 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6053 times:

Depleted Cranium had a good post on the YAL-1 last december:
http://depletedcranium.com/the-yal-1...ng-airplane-but-whats-it-good-for/



Las Malvinas son Argentinas
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12134 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 17 hours ago) and read 5876 times:

Quoting titanmiller (Thread starter):
seems like an awful lot of money to spend when the countermeasure is to simply strip the paint off missiles and polish the aluminum to a mirror finish. I'm sure that the engineers though of this.

It takes more than a shiny surface to defeat a chemical laser.


User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 5240 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 1):
You can't put a price on homeland security. I believe that laser technology is the future and should be invested in accordingly.

        

I hope they reconstitute the program someday as the technology seemed sound.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineOroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 911 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5227 times:

Great program, kinda felt like a modern take on a cold war dinosaur.

I would expect the developed technology will find another application. They were testing a laser on a AC-130 that could burn through engine blocks of cars, and then there was one that could cook off mortar rounds in flight... those seem like more practical uses for lasers right now rather than a giant laser flying around in case someone launches scuds.


User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4976 times:

Had they decided to go operational with it, they could easily stationed the aircraft at a U.S. or NATO European air base and integrate it into Obama's scaled back missile defense of Europe. I realize it would be expensive, but as a taxpayer, as well as a former USAF officer, I'm disheartened over the $ Billions spent on this program, which by all accounts, seemed relatively successful and was close to becoming combat ready, and then cancelled.

My guess is that the aircraft will be mothballed.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineSSTeve From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4932 times:

It's a sunk cost. So you now look at whether additional spending would make it worthwhile to do anything with what you already have.

The answer's no. Keep it mothballed.

Always thought Korea or Bahrain were the only two stations that made sense with the limited range.


User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2419 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4666 times:

Looks like a few hundred million dollars wasted per plane, and billions for the program.    Where are the fiscal conservatives?


oh boy!!!
User currently offlineRonaldo747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4236 times:

It must have only a handful of cycles and a few hundred flight hours, at most. At the structual sight, it's still a brand new airplane. Just hope someone (USAF/NASA etc.) will find a new task for her. Maybe a second SOFIA-airplane?

User currently offlineHumanitarian From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4160 times:

Quoting Ronaldo747 (Reply 13):
It must have only a handful of cycles and a few hundred flight hours, at most. At the structual sight, it's still a brand new airplane. Just hope someone (USAF/NASA etc.) will find a new task for her. Maybe a second SOFIA-airplane?

A second life is already being looked into.


User currently offlineSSTeve From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 700 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4017 times:

Quoting Humanitarian (Reply 14):
A second life is already being looked into.

I'm not sure it should be. Sure, a nearly new frame sitting in the desert is a bit of a shame, but OTOH, given some sort of fulminating crisis in Iran or North Korea, perhaps this thing would be deployed. Remove the equipment and it's no longer on the shelf.


User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3473 posts, RR: 27
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4005 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 12):
Looks like a few hundred million dollars wasted per plane, and billions for the program. Where are the fiscal conservatives?


The WTO says that money was a blatant subsidy to Boeing.. so they had to park it (humor)


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Boeing YAL-1 Airborne Laser
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
"Airborne Laser" On A Usaf B747 posted Fri Feb 12 2010 12:41:08 by B738FlyUIA
YAL-1A Laser Test Fired posted Thu Sep 11 2008 10:20:42 by JFKTOWERFAN
Airborne Laser To Test-fire In Flight posted Mon Jan 29 2007 22:44:44 by JakeOrion
Airborne Laser News: Possible Model Change! posted Sat Oct 14 2006 07:43:48 by MCIGuy
Development Of Airborne Laser (B744F) posted Wed Oct 6 2004 13:55:21 by Na
Airborne Laser posted Fri Aug 16 2002 14:41:12 by Kiwi dave
Boeing Laser Avenger Shoots Down Unmanned A/c posted Mon Feb 2 2009 22:17:05 by Mortyman
Boeing Fires Solid-state Laser posted Tue Jun 3 2008 17:25:59 by ZuluAviator994
Boeing Begins Flight Tests Of Laser Gunship posted Sat Oct 14 2006 03:04:08 by AerospaceFan
TWA Boeing 707 In Viet Nam August 1967 posted Sun Dec 4 2011 21:52:56 by gegtim

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format