The US military has had "directed energy" technology available for years, but getting it into the form of a battlefield-practical weapon is taking longer than hoped. Some directed energy weapons act much like phasers from Star Trek -- they have a range of settings from "annoy" to "stun" to "lethal" that hit the target at the speed of light and can be easily redirected and refocused. Certain frequencies can even travel through walls. Couple that with heat-sensing technology that lets you "see" through walls, and you'd be able to immobilize every person in a room before entering -- something soldiers could definitely use on raids.
"It's a great technology with enormous potential, but I think the environment's not strong for it," said James Jay Carafano, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation who blames the military and Congress for not spending enough on getting directed energy to the front. "The tragedy is that I think it's exactly the right time for this."
The flexibility of directed-energy weapons could be vital as wide-scale, force-on-force conflict becomes increasingly rare, many experts say. But the technology has been slowed by such practical concerns as how to shrink beam-firing antennas and power supplies.
Military officials also say more needs to be done to assure the international community that directed-energy weapons set to stun rather than kill will not harm noncombatants.
Certain forms of directed energy weapons are already in use in places like Iraq. A hand-held laser that temporarily blinds a target by filling their field of vision with bright light is already used at checkpoints and roadblocks. These low-power lasers do no permanent damage. Other weapons in development send pulses that disable land mines and vehicles without physically destroying them.
Other energy weapons being developed are on a much larger, much more damaging scale:
A separate branch of directed-energy research involves bigger, badder beams: lasers that could obliterate targets tens of miles away from ships or planes. Such a strike would be so surgical that, as some designers put it at a recent conference here, the military could plausibly deny responsibility.
The main problem with deployment of these weapons is making them small enough to transport easily, and, of course, powering them.
I think it would be great if soldiers could stun or otherwise disable potential enemies using a targeted beam, and without using current chemical or projectile weapons that can cause serious and permanent harm.
PAGE:
1 | 2
Comments
btiddles
United Kingdom
June 2005
JUL 10, 2005 10:07 AM
Mullen
San Diego, CA
April 2003
JUL 10, 2005 11:38 AM
spheniscidae
Vancouver, BC
October 2003
JUL 10, 2005 12:11 PM
Vampirate
Durham, NC
October 2004
JUL 10, 2005 12:51 PM
crackedhead
San Jose, CA
September 2004
JUL 11, 2005 01:26 AM
bean
STAFF
Los Angeles, CA
JUL 11, 2005 01:40 AM
PAGE:
1 | 2