Share.

    27 Kommentare

    1. Longjumping-Box5691 on

      SS. Ever wake up and there are 50 new wildfires and they say lightning but it’s been clear and sunny for days.. it’s weapons like this they use.

    2. No-stradumbass on

      Why would you need that when a match would work for much cheaper and with less people involved? You can go to Nevada and buy loads of fireworks for a fraction of the cost to launch that.

    3. ProfessionPrior7952 on

      As someone who grew up in a rain forest 50 new fires isn’t crazy
      . Saying it’s a direct energy weapon does sound nuts. Why the hell do people on this sub come up for the craziest solutions for mundane problems.

    4. I don’t know anything about directed energy weapons, but I did a reverse image search. That pic comes from here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_oxygen_iodine_laser](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_oxygen_iodine_laser)

      Just some highlights from that page:

      A COIL system mounted on a Boeing 747 variant known as the YAL-1 Airborne Laser.

      A chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) is a near–infrared chemical laser. As the beam is infrared, it cannot be seen with the naked eye. It is capable of output power scaling up to megawatts in continuous mode.

      COIL is a component of the United States‘ military airborne laser and advanced tactical laser programs. On February 11, 2010, this weapon was successfully deployed to shoot down a missile off the central California coast in a test conducted with a laser aboard a Boeing 747 that took off from the Point Mugu Naval Air Warfare Center (for more details, see Boeing YAL-1).

      So in other words, scary as hell, and it doesn’t sound impossible that this could do some real damage. It if can shoot down a missile I’m sure it can start a fire. And it says that shooting down the missile was 2010. What do they have now?

    5. What power source is it using? I mean if it’s a directed energy weapon, that energy needs a source and I doubt it’s just a big ass magnifying glass.

      It’s way easier and cheaper to start a wildfire by conventional means. I mean they would spend millions to do what 2 junkies with a crack pipe and poor decision making skills did for however much the drugs they bought cost

    6. It looks like a pretty mega bug. Too bad we must dismantle it to save humanity

    7. Lol just a low pass and pop some flares would do the trick. Every fire I ever encountered first hand the source tree was hit by lightning though….

    8. hooligan415 on

      Seems unnecessary when Uncle Cletus dragging chains down the highway or tossing a butt out the window seems to be starting fires just fine out West all these years.

    9. That is a stupidly expensive way to start a fire fire when you could just pay a few teenagers off to run in and do it or if you really need to use a plane just use a small Cessna and drop a couple incendiary balls fro mthe plane. Fun fact incendiary balls are actually used for back burning areas of forest to create a fire break.

    Leave A Reply