From: stevenw@best.com (Steven Weller)
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:39:54 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: [NOISE] What is "laser material"?
Message-ID: <v01540b00ada697d870e0@[206.86.1.35]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>At 4:05 AM 4/26/96, Bill Frantz wrote:
>
>>>   Moreover, a laser shot costs $3,000, compared to several
>>>   million dollars for a missile. Army officials envision the
>>>   Nautilus would be beamed from a truck capable of firing 50
>>>   shots before requiring more laser material.
>>
>>Does anyone have any idea what "more laser material" means?
>>
>
>Sure, most high-power lasers like this are chemical lasers, consuming
>reactive materials.
>
>(This is not the same as "gas lasers," a la the early CO2 lasers. And of
>course ruby and Nd-YAG lasers are not what is meant here, either.)
>
>P.S. I don't place much faith in laser weaponry. Some obvious
>countermeasures are: spin the projectile to minimize heating of any one
>spot, determine the wavelength of the planned laser and coat the projectile
>with a suitably reflective coating, apply ablative layers that can burn off
>without harm, etc. Such countermeasures are of course well-known to the
>laser builders, but they still make the game much tougher. All a matter of
>attack and counter-attack, and the costs of each. Like castles and siege
>engines. Or like crypto.
>
>--Tim May

Other problems include tracking the missile accurately for the one or two
seconds (that's likely to be a mile or so if it's anything like a Scud) and
handling the dispersive effect of the air temperature gradient caused by
the laser itself.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Weller                      |  Weller's three steps to Greatness:
                                   |     1. See what others cannot
                                   |     2. Think what others cannot
stevenw@best.com                   |     3. Express what others cannot