Navy To Deploy Laser System This Summer

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
As if our military wasn't bad ass enough as it is, soon we'll have lasers on our ships. Not bad ass enough? We'll have rail guns after that. :cool:

Some of the Navy's futuristic weapons sound like something out of "Star Wars," with lasers designed to shoot down aerial drones and electric guns that fire projectiles at hypersonic speeds. That future is now. The Navy plans to deploy its first laser on a ship later this year, and it intends to test an electromagnetic rail gun prototype aboard a vessel within two years.
Click to expand...
 
It's about time...

They've been testing them onboard ships for the last 25+ years.
 
The real-life railgun is pathetic. This is a railgun.

Metalgearrex.jpg
 
Uberidiot said:
Killing people is not badass.
Click to expand...

Ending a war quickly or preventing it in the first place saves lives and is badass. Besides, if these are abused then we can vote out the clown abusing them. If it is another country abusing them, voting won't do much to stop it.
 
MaddBomber83 said:
Ending a war quickly or preventing it in the first place saves lives and is badass. Besides, if these are abused then we can vote out the clown abusing them. If it is another country abusing them, voting won't do much to stop it.
Click to expand...

You think voting a clown out of office would stop anything from happening here? Like when that guy that promised to close Gitmo got elected...
 
MaddBomber83 said:
Ending a war quickly or preventing it in the first place saves lives and is badass. Besides, if these are abused then we can vote out the clown abusing them. If it is another country abusing them, voting won't do much to stop it.
Click to expand...

Ending war quickly?
What fantasy world do you live in. What is quickly? Ten years? Oh wait, we need to rebuild a country too, so now we just occupy.

Now, I agree, having and understanding that we will fuck a party up if they come and start shit with our country, but that should be it. Beat them back until they know to leave us along and then we go back to minding our own business. Speak softly and carry a big stick mentality.
 
You think voting a clown out of office would stop anything from happening here? Like when that guy that promised to close Gitmo got elected...
Click to expand...

It's not the president's fault that people are so gulible as to believe the office of the president is all powerful. If a guy is running for president on promisses that are beyond his power to actually make happen then you need to rethink your vote.
 
What fantasy world do you live in. What is quickly? Ten years? Oh wait, we need to rebuild a country too, so now we just occupy.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, are you talking about Iraq or Afghanistan, they are two very different conflicts and both have run a good while, tho Iraq is over for all it matters.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Out of curiosity when was the last time our top of the line navy ship ended a war quickly?
Click to expand...

Every ship in the navy was top of the line at some point, and the roles they played in any engagements they've been involved in, most recently the Libyan civil war, most certainly ended more quickly than they would have had we gone in with sharpened wooden sticks and fisticuffs.
 
Uberidiot said:
Killing people is not badass.
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree. There are many people I would enjoy seeing killed in innovative and creative new ways.

Not that I'm not very thankful they got Osama Bin Laden, but I really wish they could have gotten him with a ship based massive laser.
 
Uberidiot said:
Killing people is not badass.
Click to expand...

You understand that the reason to build bigger and "badder-ass" weapons is deterrence correct? How many Minuteman's or Peacekeeper's did we drop? If the US does not build them someone else will. And that's not a position the World's superpower wants to be in...
 
lcpiper said:
It's not the president's fault that people are so gulible as to believe the office of the president is all powerful. If a guy is running for president on promisses that are beyond his power to actually make happen then you need to rethink your vote.
Click to expand...

The implication here is that there was some candidate I could have voted for that did not make "promisses that are beyond his power to actually make happen".

My challenge to you sir: Name that candidate!
 
GaryJohnson said:
Every ship in the navy was top of the line at some point, and the roles they played in any engagements they've been involved in, most recently the Libyan civil war, most certainly ended more quickly than they would have had we gone in with sharpened wooden sticks and fisticuffs.
Click to expand...

Yeah so we either have multi-billion dollar warships or we have wooden sticks, there's no middle ground? I mean 1 WW2 era cruiser probably could single handily taken out the entire Libyan navy, not to mention I'll admit to not watching a lot of CNN but I'm not quite sure there was a lot of naval engagement during that civil war was there?
 
lcpiper said:
Kueller, here are John McCain's campaign promises for 2008. Read them and tell me if they sound like promises he doesn't have the individual power to observe.
http://www.cps-news.com/archives/john-mccains-campaign-promises/

Here are a few of Obama's from 2008.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/05/brief-look-at-candidate-obama-2008-campaign-promises/

Do you notice a difference in tone?
Click to expand...
One is a Fox News link and the other is not? :p

But beyond tone, many of McCain's "promisses [that are] beyond his power to actually make happen". He's got a ton of legislative promises in that list. POTUS can't pass legislation, that's why we have the legislative branch (of course in practice, the legislative branch can't seem to pass legislation either).

3 in a row off that link:
Implement laws to hold financial firms accountable
“Second, I will propose and sign into law reforms to prevent financial firms from concealing their bad practices.”—9/19/08, Green Bay, Wis.

Double child exemption
“I will double the child exemption from $3,500 to $7,000 to help families pay for the rising cost of living.”—9/19/08, Green Bay, Wis.

Balance the budget
“John McCain will balance the budget by the end of his first term.”—JohnMcCain.com
Click to expand...
POTUS can propose all the legislation he wants, but he can't sign into law what doesn't come back from the black hole that is congress.

My vote is worthless no matter whom it goes to, they're all disingenuous clowns. But to the point I was originally addressing before you decided to go tangential: I have no confidence that if we voted someone out for misusing laser/railgun armed ships the person we elected to take their place would proceed any differently.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Yeah so we either have multi-billion dollar warships or we have wooden sticks, there's no middle ground? I mean 1 WW2 era cruiser probably could single handily taken out the entire Libyan navy, not to mention I'll admit to not watching a lot of CNN but I'm not quite sure there was a lot of naval engagement during that civil war was there?
Click to expand...

A WW2 era cruiser would be a maintenance nightmare and cost taxpayers more than something newer and more reliable. There was also plenty of naval engagement, it just wasn't ship to ship. Mostly the occasional cruise missile launch or planes launching from aircraft carriers that could be on station quicker than those that would have to fly from England, Germany or Italy.

Thing is though, most of our fleet is not brand spanking new. Most of our naval fleet is 30+ years old and gets retrofitted with newer tech as they get it. Its not like the military goes out and replaces everything each year with brand new equipment like Paris Hilton on a spending spree getting the latest season's fashions. Equipment that is too worn out gets junked and metal recycled. The military is given a budget by congress each year, and tech like this takes years to develop and implement. These programs get approved years ago, and use allocated funds from their budget each and every year to pay for it. For example, stealth fighters started development in the 60's-70's (A-12/SR-71, Have Blue/F-117) and didn't see widespread combat until late 80's.

You guys want to blame Bush, Obama, or a particular political party are incredibly naive. Tech like this doesn't get developed one year then implemented the next. For laser tech development like this you could look back at development as far as Reagan and his "Star Wars" initiative in the mid 80's. The military budget that sponsors programs like this is approved by the congress during those periods, and every few years the congress can completely change political parties who will continue to approve budgets for these sorts of things. Military tech always has a way of making advances to less violent civil applications too. Today we have a laser that can be mounted on a warship, tomorrow we could have a laser that could propel a NASA spaceship. :cool:


So lets stop debating the politics of it for once, and be glad that tech is advancing. Why do you guys always have to turn these threads from a celebration of tech into bullshit political discussions?
 
I think the consumer protection agency needs to be notified, I didn't see a Laser light warning sticker ANYWHERE on that ship!
 
MaddBomber83 said:
Ending a war quickly or preventing it in the first place saves lives and is badass. Besides, if these are abused then we can vote out the clown abusing them. If it is another country abusing them, voting won't do much to stop it.
Click to expand...

You're forgetting one eensy-weensy detail: The latest and greatest killing technology always makes its way to the 'bad guys' sooner or later. It won't be nearly so 'badass' when the other guys start blasting 'us' with hypervelocity projectiles, will it?

Our society's incessant glorification of war and its 'bitchin' machines leads to nothing but.... more pointless war.
 
The latest and greatest killing technology always makes its way to the 'bad guys' sooner or later.
Click to expand...
Nope, not even close. Sometimes they get a close facsimile, something that is a shadow of the real deal, but it usually can't keep up with the real deal. Or did you completely miss the outcome of two wars with Iraq'a Republican Guards?
 
Geonerd said:
You're forgetting one eensy-weensy detail: The latest and greatest killing technology always makes its way to the 'bad guys' sooner or later. It won't be nearly so 'badass' when the other guys start blasting 'us' with hypervelocity projectiles, will it?

Our society's incessant glorification of war and its 'bitchin' machines leads to nothing but.... more pointless war.
Click to expand...

Which society's? The Greeks? if they hadn't invented the Phalanx "citizen soldiers" and assorted other military techniques and inventions Western society as we know it may well have been stillborn. who knows how things would have played out if the Persian empire had destroyed Greek culture.

Or perhaps the Invention of Radar and its application by the Royal Air Force. you could argue that one series of developments kept the UK in the War and prevented a dark age in Europe that might still be ongoing.

Or I suppose if we hadn't had superior military tech those damned Neanderthals would have wiped us out... :p


Someone will develop these things, unless you have magical powers that render all military applications of new technology inert somehow, its going to happen. I'd rather that laser armed ship be flying a US flag only for as long as possible, but that's just me.
 
lcpiper said:
It's not the president's fault that people are so gulible as to believe the office of the president is all powerful. If a guy is running for president on promisses that are beyond his power to actually make happen then you need to rethink your vote.
Click to expand...

Pathetic. Of course he could close Gitmo. If a republican did that you would be livid.

Why not hold all politicians to the same standard instead of being a partisan?
 
haste. said:
You understand that the reason to build bigger and "badder-ass" weapons is deterrence correct? ...
Click to expand...

That's maybe a reason but certainly not the reason.

Unless by deterrence you mean power and money, which I guess is all the same thing in the end.
 
I can't help but remember that all the military technology in the world didn't stop a bunch of fanatics with box cutters nor has it put an end to the violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, which is largely perpetrated by dirt poor, poorly equipped fanatics.

Perhaps an alternative method is worth a try? Maybe a change from thuggish Cold War foreign policy?

"Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?
 
Geonerd said:
You're forgetting one eensy-weensy detail: The latest and greatest killing technology always makes its way to the 'bad guys' sooner or later. It won't be nearly so 'badass' when the other guys start blasting 'us' with hypervelocity projectiles, will it?

Our society's incessant glorification of war and its 'bitchin' machines leads to nothing but.... more pointless war.
Click to expand...

Besides some European countries, I can't think of anyone that has a mobile platform with a nuclear generator, and the means to support a railgun, or a high powered laser system...Oh I'm sure Russia might have something, but I wouldn't want to be anywhere near it, when they fire it up.
 
Pathetic. Of course he could close Gitmo. If a republican did that you would be livid.

Why not hold all politicians to the same standard instead of being a partisan?
Reply With Quote
Click to expand...

No, he can't close GITMO because that authority does not reside with the President of the United States.

And why is it you assume you know my political leanings?

Are you assuming I am making excuses for Obama?

I voted for McCain in 2008 and some Mormon guy the world has already forgotten about in 2012.
 
Some guys here love to point out the many conflicts that have happened around the world and draw a correlation between them and US involvement and claim they must be started by the US, and the motivation must be corporate greed, and on down that bullshit line of crap.

But if that thinking is true, then explain the results of the Military Successes the US has been involved in over the last several decades. WW2 resulted in rebuilt modern nations in Europe and Asia, most notably Germany and Japan. The Korean War was a draw, but more then 60 years later, which of the two countries would you rather live in?
 
Something about how everything you talk about politics in a tech/computer-y forum causes a puppy to be killed comes to mind. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top