Back to Squawk list
  • 31

The Air Force Is Putting Death Rays on Fighter Jets. Yes, Death Rays.

Lasers will help older fighters stay alive while flying the deadly skies. The U.S. Air Force envisions placing laser weapon systems on fighter jets by the mid-2020s. The service is banking on a defense contractor’s SHiELD laser system, a pod-mounted laser that will protect fighters from incoming missiles. ( और अधिक...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Charlie Roberts 14
and frickin' sharks too!!
Michael Stansfield 3
Fins to the left! }-^')
Michael Huggins 1
Michael Huggins 0
Whoever downvoted this apparently doesn't understand what this thread is talking about. Oh behave!!
WhiteKnight77 3
Some people just do not get Jimmy. ;)
Michael Huggins 3
alan75035 3
Some people get all the cool toys! :(
nathatt 2
They've been doing this for 20+ years.
Dan Grelinger 2
And Popular Mechanics succumbs to modern media's trend towards fake news headlines to get clicks.

"Death Rays?" Who dreamed up that absurdity? An incompetent journalist? Oh, but I repeat myself.

The article actually does a good case of suggesting this weapon as really an "ANTI-DEATH" weapon.
Bruce Horwitz 2
Well, let's just say that taking your technology cues from Popular Mechanics is about one step above Buck Rogers.
WhiteKnight77 1
While not every prediction comes true, there are things that have.
Bruce Horwitz 2
Your point being? It may be fun to see what technological developments are being played with and that is what PM does - provide entertainment for technology fans. Nothing wrong with that (I used to read Popular Science regularly when I was a kid - PM at that time really stuck to, well, mechanics). But one really shouldn't look to PM for an analysis of those technologies or read their articles as predictions of winners or losers. They are reporting, not analyzing.
WhiteKnight77 1
That even a reknowed magazine can get it wrong. Don't forget, that even in this day and age in which information is kept in the ether, it relies on mechanical devices of some type somewhere.
Dan Grelinger 1
My suggestion is that one will get it wrong when one doesn't care about getting it right. That headline was so contrived and absurd to suggest beyond reasonable doubt that there wasn't any care given by Popular Mechanics to get it right. Unless the definition of getting it right is manipulating people into clicking a fake news headline to then make money by feeding them ads. As a discerning reader, I expect more from publications that want to be respected.
WhiteKnight77 1
PM has been making predictions since its inception, you may have missed reading them. Even in this article, the subheading states such.

"Popular Mechanics is in the business of predicting. Whether it's tech trends, concept cars or tomorrow's top science, we have been looking forward on the printed page throughout our 100-plus-year history. And it's not always accurate."

What you may remember about it and what I remember about it appear to be 2 different things. Their prediction in 1968 about watches being communication devices as well as time pieces was off by a few years, but surprisingly close as to function with the inception of the Apple Watch.

We can agree to disagree.
Dan Grelinger 2
You are on some other point that I did not make.

Nowhere in the article does it substantiate use of the term 'Death Rays'. And in case we might have misinterpreted the headlines meaning, it is repeated. 'Yes, Death Rays'. The use of the term had one purpose only. To get clicks by misrepresenting the facts into something absurd.
WhiteKnight77 2
And PM has been using such article headlines since its inception as well.
Dan Grelinger 2
Too bad. That does not speak at all well of the editors.
Maybe build some "X-wing" fighters and a couple of "Tie" fighters as well?
lynx318 2
R2 that stabiliser has come loose again.
Charlie Roberts 1
If I can fly and X-Wing, where do I sign up?
Michael Knodl 1
This is very very impressive engineer aerospace this is music to my ears
Charlie Graydon 1
very scary stuff California have enough problems with forest fires now you are going to let the airforce fly around with a laser weapon system it great if it hit the target but what happens when they miss ???
Jeff Hill 1
There's a whole lot of computing required to compute the trajectories of two high speed objects that are maneuvering to avoid being hit. The radar to track the incoming missile needs to be extremely precise, and the servo mechanism to aim the laser has to be both precise and very fast to hit and keep the laser on target long enough to do any damage. On the plus side, you probably don't have to "fry the electronics" on an IR guided missile. You probably just need to heat the sensor up enough to confuse it to defeat the missile.
Rick Krejci 1
And Russia is developing...mirrors
Philip Lanum 1
Mirrors reflect radar really well.

Not a good choice.
lynx318 1
Surprised there isn't development of mini railguns to shoot missiles down with hypersonic darts.
patrick baker 1
considering the immense power requirements of such a system, i will be interested in how this defensive laser system comes to be put on aircraft....
D Rotten 0
Ahhhh......Lockheed Martin; the holder of all thing 'ET' Tech! They have all sorts of 'fun' stuff that the public has no clue about. The public (most) is also unaware the we've had DEW (Direct Energy Weapons) in space and here on the ground. Children are naive, after all.


क्या आपका कोई खाता नहीं है? अनुकूलित विशेषताओं, फ्लाइट अलर्टों,और अधिक के लिए अब(नि:शुल्क) रजिस्टर करें!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.