| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| The Demise Of THEL |
| 2006-08-04 |
| Ten years ago, in a preview of the current Middle East crisis, Hezbollah guerrillas fired hundreds of Katyusha rockets into Israel. The attacks prompted President Bill Clinton and the Israeli prime minister, Shimon Peres, to agree to develop a futuristic laser meant to destroy the rockets in flight. But last September, after spending more than $300 million, the United States and Israel quietly shelved the experimental weapon, mainly because of its bulkiness, high costs and poor anticipated results on the battlefield. “Frankly, its performance was not great,” said Penrose C. Albright, a former Pentagon official who helped initiate the project. “Under certain conditions you can make it work. But under salvo or cloudy conditions, you’ve got problems. In northern Israel, about 30 percent of the time, you’ve got a cloud deck.” |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #15 I was recently reading about a mobile version of THEL. Can't recall the link |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-08-04 21:06 |
| #14 "“Frankly, its performance was not great,” said Penrose C. Albright, a former Pentagon official who helped initiate the project. “Under certain conditions you can make it work." I think the same could be said of the Wright Flyer in 1903. it took them until 1908 to publicly show a practical flying machine. 300 mil over 10 years sounds like alot, but it isnt. |
| Posted by: Mark E. 2006-08-04 15:55 |
| #13 Even if it was a given that DEWs (Directed Energy Weapons) would not work, which is not at all true, I'd still like to hear about the efficacy of high rep-rate rail guns. Microwave radar can penetrate cloud cover and provide fire control just fine. There's no reason a linear accelerator (or cluster of them) can't spew huge quantities of ultra-high velocity slugs. Plenty of research has already been done into using alternate format energy beams to perform "atmospheric boring" in order to create a (less perturbated) clear-path for conventional DEWs. Any uncertainty arising from this announcement is most likely due to non-release of classified information than any overall failure of this methodology. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-04 15:29 |
| #12 I think Penrose Albright is a perfectly masculine name. |
| Posted by: Percy Dovetonsils 2006-08-04 14:21 |
| #11 Dr. Penrose "Parney" Albright...former DARPA weenie and longtime beltway insider. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-08-04 11:43 |
| #10 “Frankly, its performance was not great,” said Penrose C. Albright, a former Pentagon official who helped initiate the project. “Under certain conditions you can make it work. But under salvo or cloudy conditions, you’ve got problems. In northern Israel, about 30 percent of the time, you’ve got a cloud deck.” I get nervous when someone named Penrose Albright works in the Pentagon, much less makes comments to the NYT about this program. What a freakin' un-military name. And, note that he says it wouldn't work 30% of the time (his inference)...so protecting Israel (a country the size of a postage stamp surrounded by Fed Ex box size countries that hate them) 70% of the time is not "worth it"? PSHAW! He and other military experts say the aborted project is a case study in the challenges of building antimissile weapons and the consequences of failure. Today, northern Israel remains defenseless against the Katyushas and other small rockets. While I'd be the first to scrap any system which doesn't seem to work and/or is wasting taxpayer's money, this one sounds like it lives on in other programs, thank goodness. I praise Allan that the Hezzies are such bad shots with the Keytushas that Israel IS probably better off not wasting money on this, and instead further investing in the IAF, lol. |
| Posted by: BA 2006-08-04 11:36 |
| #9 The NYT commenting on weapons systems is like an imam commenting on Judaism. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2006-08-04 08:07 |
| #8 Umm .... directed energy weapons are alive and well, folks. And not all of them are land-based. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-08-04 06:51 |
| #7 Typical whining from the New York Times. Robert Fulton was unable to get his newly-invented submarine to sink ships during trials. So submarines can't sink ships, right? Tell it to the crew of the Lusitania. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2006-08-04 05:38 |
| #6 Anyone can put this under opinion: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/08/israels_lost_moment.html Sorry but i click submit and nothing happens. |
| Posted by: Clerert Uneamp2772 2006-08-04 03:01 |
| #5 Or do what many navies use for shooting down missiles. Guns. |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-08-04 02:19 |
| #4 Organize a seance to call up the spirit of TESLA for a DEATH RAY that works. ___________________________borgboy |
| Posted by: borgboy 2006-08-04 01:48 |
| #3 They are smoking the "missle defense will never work so we should not try" weed. None of what was learned has value? I find that very doubtful. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2006-08-04 01:40 |
| #2 Um, really not sure what these guys are smoking, but it was replaced by Skyguard. |
| Posted by: Valentine 2006-08-04 01:13 |
| #1 Good article, Moose. With NoKo-Iran and the TP-2 missiles straddling the DMZ, the THEL would come in handy in more than one theater right now. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-08-04 00:37 |