
US Navy ready to deploy laser for first time - Varcht
http://www.apnews.com/ap/db_15897/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=SgFdoPRA
======
UnoriginalGuy
This seems misleading:

> Both costs pennies on the dollar compared with missiles and smart bombs

A laser weapon is not an over-the-horizon weapon, so its spear of effect is
quite a bit smaller than a "missile and smart bomb." It might be able to
displace a Mark 45 gun or the Phalanx CIWS point defence system, but neither
of which are missiles or smart bombs, and both fire relatively inexpensive
(but heavy) ammunition.

It could not replace weapon systems like the Harpoon, Tomahawk, or Trident.

You could, in theory, get rid of SAMs and replace them with this laser system.
But you better be damn confident in the laser system's ability to
automatically target and destroy incoming projectiles as the laser has to wait
a lot longer to fire than a SAM system does just due to line of sight (which
is damn scary if the attackers are in supersonic aircraft, as it is reasonable
to expect them to be).

Now you might say: "It is computer controlled! It will be like Robocop!"

But if you look at the Phalanx CIWS which is also computer controlled, it is
damn terrible at targeting pretty much anything unless it is someone
approaching in a trawler going 8 knots (and maybe even then you might miss a
few times).

~~~
Havoc
>A laser weapon is not an over-the-horizon weapon

I'd imagine the long term plan is to roll both lasers and rail guns. The combo
seems ideal. Cheat laser shots to swat missiles and drones out of the
surroundings whilst bombarding everything further away with the railgun. I bet
with a bit of clever tech you can pull off some insane over-the-horizon
railgun shots.

>Phalanx CIWS which is also computer controlled, it is damn terrible at
targeting pretty much anything

Laser having +- zero flight time should solve most of that.

~~~
UnoriginalGuy
> I bet with a bit of clever tech you can pull off some insane over-the-
> horizon railgun shots.

The projectiles would only have the force of gravity/terminal velocity behind
them unless they have been able to create an explosive railgun projectile
(that doesn't explode on the launchpad due to the extremely high temperatures
and other shock railguns apply to their projectiles).

> Laser having +- zero flight time should solve most of that.

I think "most of that" is a little overly optimistic. Target tracking is a
complex problem, particularly in a war-like scenario where the target might
very well be supersonic and in less than ideal weather conditions.

Anti-ship missiles can and are designed to travel below radar range, so trying
to get a good sense of depth against a blue sea and white/blue horizon is far
from trivial even for a computer.

The laser still might be the "least bad" defensive weapon against anti-ship
missiles, but the whole thing is far from full-proof. We haven't really seen a
full on naval conflict between two modern navies, so we kind of forget just
how amazing most of the weapons are these days.

~~~
Havoc
>I think "most of that" is a little overly optimistic. Target tracking is a
complex problem

I disagree. The current complexity of target tracking comes mostly from that
fact that you need to work out firstly where the thing is, secondly where its
heading (in 3 dimensions & in real time) and third how fast. Having a +- zero
flight time means you only need to do the first step. You can always rinse &
repeat if its a laser pulse.

Essentially its the difference between hitting a moving car with a tennis ball
and hitting a stationary car with a tennis ball. Thats why I think it would
solve "most of that".

Obviously if the laser isn't a pulse(s) then you're back to square one.

~~~
ChrisOstler
That assumes that aiming the laser is instantaneous, too. I have no idea if
that is the case or not.

~~~
Havoc
>That assumes that aiming the laser is instantaneous, too.

I was simplifying quite a bit & making assumptions yes. Another slightly
sketchy assumption is that the laser fires instantly...chances are there is
some kind of power up delay.

------
deletes
_With a laser operating on about 30 kilowatts of electricity - and possibly
three times that in the future - the cost amounts to a few dollars per shot,
Thompson said._

The important part. Power is plentiful on a ship. No need to pay for and carry
ammunition. The cost for a single rocket or cannon volley is usually in the
thousands of dollars.

~~~
prestadige
Indeed, and although the US Navy has plenty of power already, I'm interested
to know how the polywell prototype fusor that they've been sponsoring is
coming along.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell)

~~~
sp332
I'm having trouble finding any more documents than are listed in that article,
but I did find more grants for development
[https://www.fpds.gov/ezsearch/search.do?desc=Y&sortBy=SIGNED...](https://www.fpds.gov/ezsearch/search.do?desc=Y&sortBy=SIGNED_DATE&s=FPDSNG.COM&q=energy%2Fmatter+VENDOR_FULL_NAME%3A%22ENERGY%2FMATTER+CONVERSION+CORPORATION%22&indexName=awardfull&templateName=1.4.3)
so it's probably still going strong. It would be nice if someone could update
their website with something more recent than 2006.
[http://www.emc2fusion.org/](http://www.emc2fusion.org/)

------
bluedino
I can't decide which I'm more excited about, railguns or lasers.

Do the Navy's railgun prototypes take a special type of ammunition or are they
just launching precision machined blanks of common metal?

~~~
adolgert
It's not common metal. The design of the slug is much of the work in creating
a railgun because the electromagnetic push comes from generating back-currents
within the slug itself. It has to be good at being pushed, then good at
flying, all without melting.

~~~
mnw21cam
Another very serious design problem with high power railguns is making a gun
where firing it doesn't destroy the rails after five shots.

------
Varcht
It will be interesting to see what counter measures can be deployed against
the lasers. Mirrors, heat shields?

~~~
UnoriginalGuy
Simply don't move into direct line of sight of an American ship and fire over-
the-horizon weapons at it? Or torpedos. Or supersonic aircraft firing
supersonic anti-ship weapons (e.g. the Indian BrahMos).

Lasers, unlike SAMs, have a very limited spear of effect.

~~~
adventured
Yeah, a mere 300 to 600 km range.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YAL-1](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YAL-1)

~~~
UnoriginalGuy
Nope:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon#Distance_to_the_horizon](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon#Distance_to_the_horizon)

~~~
adventured
Yep. Depends on where the laser is fired from, and it depends on the target.
Lasers can absolutely fire 300 to 600 km.

~~~
anigbrowl
That's not much help if you're in a ship, where a) you'll be close to sea
level and b) incoming missiles etc. will be flying low to avoid radar, rather
than high up in the air where they can be convenient targets.

Lasers can fire all the way to the moon, and it might be a great idea to put
military ones on top of mountains one day, depending on the weather, but if
we're talking about lasers on ships...the USS Nimitz (the largest aircraft
carrier class) has a height of about 36m above the waterline, so the distance
to the horizon is something like 20km or ~13 miles.

------
lutusp
> For the Navy, it's not so much about the whiz-bang technology as it is about
> the economics of such armaments. Both costs pennies on the dollar compared
> with missiles and smart bombs, and the weapons can be fired continuously,
> unlike missiles and bombs, which eventually run out.

Why is no one mentioning what seems an obvious side effect of this class of
weapon -- all the people who will be blinded by it once it goes into service?
If this system goes into service and sees actual battlefield service, the
opposing army will be quickly divided into two groups -- those wearing
protective goggles, and those who can no longer make out their hands.

My conspiracy theory (isn't there always one of those?) is that laser weapons
are a sneaky plot by the Braille publishing industry to spring back from their
present near-irrelevance.

~~~
spingsprong
Weapons that are designed to blind have been illegal for a long time. And
these types of lasers are so powerful that if one hit you in the face, you'd
probably lose more than just your eyesight.

~~~
lutusp
Yes, but as the range increases, the chance of death declines, but the chance
of blinding continues out to a much greater range. If there's really an
international law against weapons that blind, it's about the be seriously
violated.

~~~
spingsprong
There's laws against weapons designed to blind, but weapons that occasionally
blind as an accidental side effect, are legal.

I mean, bullets and shrapnel can and has blinded people, yet bullets and bombs
remain legal.

------
rthomas6
It's amazing all the cool defenses we get with all the money we pour into the
military. I heard terrorists are in the process of killing billions of people
by making them age until they die -- we ought to divert some defenses toward
this huge and imminent threat. Also I think there might be some terrorists in
the Alpha Centauri system. We need an intergalactic defense system just in
case.

------
chalst
> The Navy plans to deploy its first laser on a ship later this year

I seem to recall the Navy deployed lasers intended to blind enemy pilots in
the mid 80s.

 _Postscript_ The UK Royal Navy deployed laser dazzlers in 1982, in the
Falklands - [http://www.gizmag.com/falklands-
laser/28574/](http://www.gizmag.com/falklands-laser/28574/)

------
anigbrowl
Some video of a prototype shooting down a drone here, although it's not very
exciting to look at because it's not a movie.

[http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/04/laser-warfare-
system...](http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/04/laser-warfare-system/)

------
spiritplumber
Wow, the shark must be under a lot of pressure.

------
fredgrott
It will be interesting to see how they handle the friendly in cone of firing
problem

------
IgorPartola
I know this is completely off topic, reddit-ish, and I will get downvoted into
the oblivion, but...

Frau: Fire the laSER!

~~~
sp332
At the NYC Resistor hackspace, one is required to yell "Fire the laser!"
before starting up the laser cutter.
[https://secure.flickr.com/photos/65613494@N00/2932584280](https://secure.flickr.com/photos/65613494@N00/2932584280)

