That wasn't the headline that I would have used. I thought when I was about to read this story that they were using the lasers to simply find the IEDs. No, they're using lasers to destroy IEDs remotely. I think they're approaching the capability to put them on the frickin' heads of the sharks.

[Update a few minutes later]

Speaking of twenty-first-century warfare, Alan Boyle has an interesting piece on the new age of battlebots.

Isn't the problem spotting the IEDs more than disposing of them?

This device uses diode pumped fiber lasers, right? Really nifty work has been done over the last few years on those, and there may be spin-on to CW laser launchers if they can up the power some and mass produce beam director modules.

AOG,
couldn't they "strafe" the road in front of convoys?

I think they're approaching the capability to put them on the frickin' heads of the sharks.

But will it get you the one MEELeeyon dollars THIS time dad? Or will they just throw you a frickin' bone there?

couldn't they "strafe" the road in front of convoys?

I doubt they could do that, but the marginal cost of firing at something with this kind of system us sufficiently low that they could fire at many low probability targets without unacceptable cost.

Also, there has been considerable work on smart systems for detecting potential bombs. They have automated image recognition systems that detect changes over time in the objects along roads. A new rock (say), or even a rock with a changed shape/color, is flagged as suspicious and could be interrogated with this laser system.

Paul,
by strafe that's kind of what I meant. Point and shoot at any bump, lump or questionable spot in the road or along the side of the road.

I realize strafe is technically not the right word.