The CHP needs a few of these. That should take care of the high speed chase problem.

It's hybrid, right?

Interesting. My father was a counter-espionage agent in the OSS at the end of World War II. At a secret weapons base at Fort Knox where the OSS, and later CIA, also trained agents (I know this sounds very James Bondish) they did a weapons demo.

It was a weapon the size of a canon that was on a flatbed truck. They pointed it at a rabbit, pushed a button - no beam, no sound, nothing - and the rabbit rolled over dead. This was in the late 40s! Lasers weren't even invented until 1959! It must have been some sort of x-ray weapon.

I would have thought miniaturization would have shrunk it more by now. Maybe they need to get a few tips from Apple, Sony or IBM? :-D

Why not just add a blue color to the laser, and give Cobra a red colored laser?

government sure knows what good spendin is don't they...

It almost looks like the Madcat from Battletech.

@leicaman: Directed microwave maybe. Cooked bunny anyone?

Yes! The weapon is complete! Now hurry! The terrorists are heading north on Bakalakadaka Street!

I assume it's intimidating only on a flat plain. Something about that just doesn't look like it would handle hills too well. I can't put my finger on what it is though.

But who cares. Lasers.

They need to add a 20MM canon on it for backup.

Probably costs several million dollars, at least, and looks like it could be taken out by an RPG-7.

@King of the Wild Frontier: way to go...now the terroists know!

Military Grade Hummer: $500,000
Roof-Mounted Laser Cannon: $6,500,000

Being able to clear out Seattle rush hour traffic in under 30 seconds?

Priceless.

@leicaman:

LOL...how do yo know they don't have these types of weapons? Killing biological targets is way different than forcing the ignition of a IED.

Costs reminder (october 2007):
War in Iraq: 1.7 trillions $
War in Afghnistan: 1 Trillion $
Pentagone new weapons (like this one)Research: non communicated but think billions $
Actual US Debt: 9 trillions $

Bill for your children future: umbearable...
nice future... thank you Georges!

@King of the Wild Frontier: Yes, but you can pick one up for only $199 at Best Buy on Black Friday.

Or ... we could just give up and lose.

Then your children can live under sharia.

Loser.

I remember in the 90s, the army was developing a "close combat laser assault weapon" CCLAW system, meant to scan back & forth across the battlefield and simply BLIND all EYES (human and electronic). (one blind casualty reduces force effectiveness of opponents much more than killing one). VERY clever weapon.

I can only find a single reference to it on the web now.

[acronyms.thefreedictionary.com]

I guess the 1995 UN protocol banning weapons designed to blind probably did the program in. I wouldn't be shocked to learn that Bush resurrected it though, given his complete lack of... morals, ethics, or anything resembling a soul.

UN BAN:

The first article of this new Protocol IV initially declares, It is prohibited to employ laser weapons specifically designed, as their sole combat function or as one of their combat functions, to cause permanent blindness to unenhanced vision, that is to the naked eye or to the eye with corrective eyesight devices. . .

-

BLINDING lasers are well within our capabilities today, while blowing stuff up is much harder. It's really hard to put enough heat on a moving target, made of METAL, to burn it up or blow a large enough hole to really disable it. The UN ban only effects weapons SPECIFICALLY designed for blinding. US or other countries could design a MEDIOCRE anti-tank weapons like the one in the article, that, oh, btw, are VERY GOOD at BLINDING enemies... by "accident". Many countries are already on that road.

-

[www.fas.org]

"Anti-personnel laser weapons are inexpensive, sold openly by the Third World, have line-of-sight aiming, and are capable of producing catastrophic results if used against aircrews and sensors in flight (especially during takeoffs and landings). Commercially available laser weapons include the ZM-87, developed by the Chinese and first displayed at the International Defense Exhibition in 1995. In addition, the Russians sell a truck-mounted high-energy laser. And the University of Tasmania in Hobart sells a CO2 laser system for controlling forest undergrowth. The system is used to ignite logging debris from distances of 100 to 1,500 meters. The laser, costing $86,500, is mounted on a gun turret carried in a 2-ton truck and is simple to operate. Similar systems are available commercially throughout the world."

This weapon is pretty much useless and impractical in so far as clearing roadside bombs:

1. It's a huge honkin' target for the terrorists.

2. It probably costs $#,###,###.00 per unit. By contrast, a shoulder mounted rocket costs how much? How about a nicely placed sniper round at the lens? Yeah, terrorists win; your tax dollars lose.

3. How do they expect to charge the capacitors/batteries out in the wild? It'll blow one charge and then need to wait how long until firing again?

4. I'm pretty sure that troops would prefer a tougher, faster vehicle over another variant of the Humvee with a huge bullseye on its back adding several hundred/thousand pounds to the weight of their vehicle in case they need to get out of a sticky situation fast.

5. Clearing roadside bombs? A .50cal high explosive round seems like it would do the trick better than this at a MUCH cheaper price. How about giving them some RC cars mounted with C4? Or how about just throw a hand grenade at it? Why such hairbrained solutions to such a simple problem? (Finding them is the hard part, but that's a different problem altogether and one that this weapon doesn't solve anyways.)

Not that it's a waste...I'm sure it'll be badass and the stuff they learn today will build better variants tomorrow, but they're smoking crack if they think this thing has any sort of *practical* real life application today.

@charliedigital:

you can throw a hand grenade far enough and accurate enough to be safe from the blast zone of a roadside bomb? Are you Brett Farve?

@kbarrett: Stop to be paranoid, and get a life, Pal... It must take a very poor mind to think like this.

What I just remind you is that your government is preparing a "good" future for your children because unlimited spending won't last and somebody will have to pay the bill, your individualist person, off course, don't care because you won't be here to see the consequences...

1. A grenade doesn't have to be accurate. By it's nature, it's a dumb weapon. If I can throw a grenade in battle and not expect to die from its awesome blast radius, I'm pretty sure I can toss it at a stationary target and feel pretty safe. It's not like after you toss it, you won't have a chance to turn and run an extra 40-50 feet.

2. I offered alternatives. I bet a sniper can hit a roadside bomb, assuming it's visible, with a .50 cal high explosive round from over a mile out. Is that far and safe enough for you? How about a cheap-o RC car mounted with C4 or a grenade?

3. How about a relatively cheap shoulder mounted rocket? Easy to carry, easy to use, cheap, disposable, light, multipurpose...

These are all better alternatives than this laser.

@charliedigital: Seriously, man. Stop playing Halo RIGHT NOW. At the point at which you're suggesting that the Army (the ULTIMATE realists) are being unrealistic by not wiring up RC cars with plastic explosives, you should know that you've lost touch with reality.

Lose the Hummer and get me one on a frickin' shark....

@Razta: Seems like a 20mm gun would take out the ied just as well as the laser, but for a lot less money. But, as Ron-Mexico put it so perfectly: Who cares. Lasers.

@Pope John Peeps II:

I offered it as one extreme possibility (and half jokingly). I mean, you guys seem to be ignoring my other alternatives for no good reason.

IF THE LASER HAS LINE OF SIGHT, SO WILL A SNIPER WITH A .50 CAL

CAPS and bolded for emphasis.

Also, shoulder mounted rockets, cheap, lightweight, disposable, and multi-purpose.

If there was only a way to work the acronym R.O.A.D.R.A.G.E. into this weapon, I think they would really have something.

@Pope John Peeps II:

Also: Iraq's Coming Robot Wars

The requirement is for a remote-controlled, wireless robot that weighs 50 pounds or less "to be used for Improvised Explosive Device (IED) detection and identification," according to the Pentagon's solicitation.

@charliedigital: Are you seriously suggesting that the Army has not TRIED that already, that no one in the hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers has ever said "hey, why don't we shoot the thing". Of course they have. And for whatever reason, it's obviously not enormously successful. It's nice to sit around and play the armchair General, and memorize the Jane's catalogues about military weapons. But the Army's probably tried every single thing you could possibly suggest.

The laser is immeasurably more effective, if they can make it practical and useful on the battlefield. Instead of firing rockets at suspicious mounds on the roadside, you let a computer train a high-powered laser on it for two seconds from a distance of 1000 metres to see if it's a bomb. Seems simple to me.

RC cars have been used to search for IEDs. PVT Snuffy just runs it up to the suspect roadside trash and nudges it. If it blows, down one RC car. If you confirm it, why not strap a grenade or claymore (do they use those anymore?) to it? The question is: Can your RC handle the payload and get it where it needs to be. We have also dangled stuff off the front of the vehicles to hit trip wires prematurely. And the grenade idea isn't so far off if you are able to pitch accurately and confident you can be out of range of the resulting IED blast. Not a chance I would have taken, but there it is if you want it.

For these and other ideas check some back issues of Popular Mechanics or ask someone who was there.

Never underestimate the ingenuity of a soldier fighting for his life.

A RPG magnet... There's no way this would survive in a combat enviornment, unless it's keep in the motor pool. You might as well paint it bright yellow and put flashing kalaxons on it.

Stick with skilled snipers and cheap armor piercing .50 Cal rounds.

@balloondoggle: Good point. I saw a special on it several months ago, on the Military channel - a squad using a cheap RC and a camera to scout out alleys, or check under a vehicle for explosives, before the "real" disposal team arrives. Hillbilly robotics, but it seemed to work

@Pope John Peeps II:

The laser is immeasurably more effective, if they can make it practical and useful on the battlefield. Instead of firing rockets at suspicious mounds on the roadside, you let a computer train a high-powered laser on it for two seconds from a distance of 1000 metres to see if it's a bomb. Seems simple to me.

Except you are forgetting to mention the key shortcomings of this system:

1. It's bigger and heavier than any of the alternatives I mention. So what happens when they end up in an ambush? They'll be weighed down with extra hardware that won't have practical uses when being swarmed at close range.

2. It's many factors more expensive than any of the alternatives I've mentioned for the purpose that they are advertising. It's pretty clear that if you have line of sight, you have cheaper, faster, safer, and more convenient alternatives (.50 cal high explosive). Whereas a sniper can carry, oh I dunno, 100 rounds? Do you think that current battery and capacitor technology allows this weapon to fire more than a few times before requiring extensive recharging of its energy source?

3. It actually makes the humvee carrying it a bigger target than American humvees already are. It can be disabled fairly easily by a nicely placed sniper round. It's impractical for battlefield use by all respects.

4. Never underestimate the ability of the government to throw money at defense contractors to create expensive solutions to problems that aren't already solved. Ref: Osprey.

@charliedigital: BY THE WAY, EVERYBODY, THIS IS A DEMONSTRATION MODEL.

Nothing about this particular Humvee will ever see actual combat. But the weapon system keeps getting more and more refined. Lasers are the fantasy weapon of every army on the face of the earth, and eventually they will be made practical.

@Lukewpnunn:doctor evil I presume?

Do they make one to fit an FJ Cruiser? If so, I'm in.

Come on people I asked for one thing. All I want is Hummers with fricken lazers on their heads!!!

@huygir:Not yet.

That needs to be mounted on a Mechwarrior, or my Pacer.

Point one: Look a little closer and see the .50 cal mounted in the middle.

Point two: The Avenger is a low altitude air defense asset. The laser was made for that purpose.
The article points out that they are testing it for the alternate use of busting up IED's.
You can bet that, based on the success here, they will make a smaller version for just that application.

For an extra $100, they'll install a movie projector so you and the platoon can watch all your favorite war movies back at the barracks.

The government has been playing too much Command and Conquer.

@kbarrett: Nice, so if we leave Iraq, that translates to our children living under sharia...Imagine the Iraqi children living under US occupation right now; they get to have a bunch of snot-nosed kids marveling at the lasers being sent there to "protect" the troops who liberated, well, nothing, and now seem to protect primarily themselves, but at least you understand that if our children are not living under sharia in the future it will be a result of our stay and "victory" in Iraq.

Incidentally, Iraqi's did not live under Sharia (or anything close--as Saddam and the Baath party had long been a secular administration) before the US invasion, and the idea of Sharia was not really explored before it. Living under Sharia in Iraq came into prominence after the US Occupation, and it has never held much water amongst most of those in the country, even today, though it exists predomintantly as propaganda in the US media.

Still, you are probably right: people who are simply aware of the costs to the US and the possible effects those costs will have on our children here are just losers, while you would definately be a winner.

I'm pretty sure that image has been photoshopped. It looks like they erased the giant mech legs and jump jets and replaced it with a hummer.