Solid State Laser News

Interesting.

The biggest challenge for this technology is end-to-end efficiency. Conversion of electrical power to laser output optical power and then conversion of optical power back to electrical power are currently rather low, under about 50% each. Since the architecture proposed involves relaying the optical power with at least two intervening conversion nodes, one for the uplink and one for the downlink, we're talking less than about 0.5^4 = 6.25% end-to-end electrical-to-electrical efficiency without even accounting for atmospheric transmission losses due to absorption, scattering, and turbulence. Thus, for each kW of input electrical power, the amount of electrical power delivered at the other end of the relay will be something less than about 60 W, and probably significantly less, with current laser and detector technologies.

In a quick Google search, I could not find any specific numbers for the system or component efficiencies for the DARPA POWER program nor for Powerlight Technologies' systems.

I did find this statement from https://expatguideturkey.com/darpa-makes-nikola-teslas-dream-come-true-global-wireless-energy/ :

"Colonel Paul Calhoun, a military official involved in the project...describes the POWER project as an optical energy beaming program. DARPA’s goal is to transmit energy via lasers with minimal energy loss in the upper atmosphere. The biggest challenge at the moment is to ensure maximum efficiency in energy conversion. DARPA is working on developing effective relays to revolutionize energy conversion. The project aims to transmit laser energy to US military bases via long-lasting satellites and drones."
 

I should look into LIDAR ASW and Anti-mine warfare developments.

A more far flung idea: I wonder if you can make a supercavitation torpedo that uses LIDAR guidance (assuming noise was what stopped guidance previously), in reverse of what people normally think of naval warfare.
If you are thinking of having a lidar on the torpedo with the lidar's laser propagating to and from the torpedo's target through the vapor bubble produced by the supercavitation torpedo instead of propagating through the water, that probably would not work since the vapor bubble does not extend very far from the surface of the torpedo.

Furthermore, lidar operational distance underwater varies considerably depending on system and environmental parameters (such as water turbidity), but is typically limited to a maximum of about 20 m to 60 m, which would be too short for guidance over the whole path from launch to impact in most scenarios. It could perhaps be used for the end game phase and for fuzing if mounted on the torpedo itself, but it might be cost prohibitive to have an expendable lidar mounted on every torpedo.

The Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System (RAMICS) program was designed as a helicopter-borne weapon system that would fire a special supercavitating projectile from a modified Gatling gun or cannon to neutralize surface and near-surface mines. The gun would be controlled by a fire-control system with targeting algorithms coupled with a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) system. The LIDAR would locate and target the mines, and provide aiming coordinates to the gun's fire control system to fire a burst of rounds at the mine, causing immediate and positive mine neutralization. See https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/an-aws-2.htm

RAMICS funding was cut in 2011 although it was tested “capable of deflagrating a mine down to 13m depth; causing rapid sinking down to 45m; and slow sinking of mines at 60m.” according to https://laststandonzombieisland.com/tag/rapid-airborne-mine-clearance-system/
 
I agree that as written, the comment is ridiculous.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, however, perhaps he meant that in addition to work on increasing power output, work is being done on reducing the propagation losses he mentioned.

For example, some orbital angular momentum states of lasers penetrate through scattering media better than Gaussian beams.

From https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7843596/ "A major challenge in use of the optical spectrum for communication and imaging applications is the scattering of light as it passes through diffuse media. Recent studies indicate that light beams with orbital angular momentum (OAM) can penetrate deeper through diffuse media than simple Gaussian beams."

Also, an ultrashort laser pulse can produce an optical filament which "can propagate through dense fog, supported by the surrounding photon bath...can also be generated and propagated even after the beam has propagated through strongly turbulent regions...Moreover, the filament position within the beam is not affected by the interaction with a turbulent region." as stated at the following link: https://www.researchgate.net/public...mtosecond_filaments_in_atmospheric_conditions

His statement "50 kW seems immensely powerful, but we'll see 50 Megawatt weapons packaged in half the size within a decade" is probably far too optimistic in terms of the timeline, but I don't think it is totally ridiculous to think that someday we'll have a 50 MW directed energy weapon packaged in half the size of today's 50 kW laser weapons.
 
In phys.org
"Using air to deflect lasers"
DOI:10.1038/s41566-023-01304-y
 
https://optics.org/news/14/10/19

"Lockheed Martin has won a contract to provide the US military with up to four 300 kW-class laser weapon systems.

Destined for the US Army’s “Indirect Fire Protection Capability-High Energy Laser (IFPC-HEL)” prototype program, the arrangement will see Lockheed deliver two prototypes, with an option for two additional units.

News of the latest deal comes just over a year after the defense contractor delivered its first 300 kW laser - created through spectral beam combining - to the US Army, with Lockheed also working towards a new output power benchmark of 500 kW. "
 
"Lockheed Martin has won a contract to provide the US military with up to four 300 kW-class laser weapon systems.

The contract was awarded in the summer. LM did a press release last week stating some contract specifics (2 systems with 2 options) and media started posting this as it was a new contract.
 
The contract was awarded in the summer. LM did a press release last week stating some contract specifics (2 systems with 2 options) and media started posting this as it was a new contract.
Thanks for the additional information which clarifies when the contract was actually awarded.
 
Although the US has performed operational field testing of HELs, I am not aware of them being used in any real world conflict. If the author of the original post had information on such use, he should have stated the specific incidences.

The US used high power microwaves in the Iraq War to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronic systems according to https://web.archive.org/web/2007110...elease_id=11326&sub_release_id=11373&view=all which states: "Electromagnetic weapons, including high power microwaves, were used to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronic systems. Generation of electromagnetic fields may have been used for other effects, and for communication. Whether electromagnetic fields contributed to illness is unknown, as are the types and magnitudes of the exposures."

The first use in combat of any directed energy weapon may be the reported use by Archimedes of a series of mirrors to focus sunlight onto enemy ships to set them on fire during the Siege of Syracuse (c. 213–212 BC), but the veracity of these reports is disputed. This event does not appear in the surviving works of Archimedes and is described by historians writing many years after the siege. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes'_heat_ray

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon , "
In the United States, the Pentagon, DARPA, the Air Force Research Laboratory, United States Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center, and the Naval Research Laboratory are researching directed-energy weapons to counter ballistic missiles, hypersonic cruise missiles, and hypersonic glide vehicles. These systems of missile defense are expected to come online no sooner than the mid to late-2020s.[3]

China,[4][5][6][7] France,[8][9][10][11] Germany,[8][9] the United Kingdom,[12][13] Russia,[14][15][16] India,[17][18][19] and Pakistan[20][21][22] are also developing military-grade directed-energy weapons, while Iran[23][24][25][26] and Turkey claim to have them in active service.[27][28][29] The first use of directed-energy weapons in combat between military forces was claimed to have occurred in Libya in August 2019 by Turkey, which claimed to use the ALKA directed-energy weapon.[30][31] "

That article also states: "The Central Intelligence Agency informed Secretary Henry Kissinger that it had twelve reports of Soviet forces using laser weapons against Chinese forces during the 1969 Sino-Soviet border clashes, though William Colby doubted that they had actually been employed.[68]"

This link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALKA_(weapon) states, "The ALKA directed-energy weapon (DEW) system is a Turkish dual electromagnetic/laser weapon developed by Roketsan.[1] It was first unveiled at the 2019 IDEF exhibition on 8 May 2019.[2] This combat laser was allegedly used to destroy one of GNC's Wing Loong II UAVs; if true, this would represent the first known time a vehicle-mounted combat laser was used to destroy another combat vehicle during genuine wartime conditions.[4][3]...

According to ROKETSAN official Prof.Uğur Kayasal the weapon was developed in response to the increase of drone attacks on Turkish forces. ROKETSAN spent five years making the directed energy weapon system and spent the last two years of the developmental period to make the system road-mobile.[2] On 4 August 2019 an ALKA DEW mounted on an off-road armored car shot down a Chinese Wing Loong II UAV in Misrata, Libya.[3]...

The ALKA DEW is claimed to have a power of 50 kW.[3] It operates both laser and electromagnetic systems.[1] It purportedly uses automatic target recognition[1] utilizing both electro-optical and radar detection[2] to track multiple targets simultaneously.[1][2] It is claimed by its designers to have the capability to disable a swarm of drones at a range of 4000 m,[2] destroy a target with laser at 500 m distance and destroy a target at 1000 m distance with electromagnetic weapons.[1] According to the designers, it can track targets at speeds as high as 150 km/h and track targets with precision of 8 mm at 1000 m distance.[1] It can purportedly operate in both night and day time and on multiple platforms, both stationary and mobile.[1] It has allegedly been used both against IEDs and UAVs in multiple environments.[1]"
 
Here it is:


Video game.

Czech Republic-based Bohemia Interactive on Oct. 10 warned that its game — set in a futuristic, fictional conflict, and easily modded and recorded by players — was being used to peddle misinformation. Staff at the BBC, the Warzone and the Times of Israel later reported the videos and accompanying descriptions were misleading.

“While it’s flattering that Arma 3 simulates modern war conflicts in such a realistic way, we are certainly not pleased that it can be mistaken for real-life combat footage and used as war propaganda,” Pavel Křižka, a Bohemia Interactive public relations manager, said in a statement.
 
To your question "So was the event real but the footage fake, or both fake?" I say that it is highly likely that both were fake.

According to your previous post with the link to the article entitled "Israel expedites Iron Beam deployment amid escalating costs of missile defense" and dated Oct 16, 2023, the Iron Beam system has not yet been deployed, stating, "The costs associated with operating the Iron Dome and other existing missile defense systems are mounting rapidly. This has led the Israeli government to urgently request Rafael Advanced Defense Systems to fast-track the deployment of Iron Beam, initially planned for 2025."

In addition, the article "No, Rafael’s ‘Iron Beam’ laser didn’t blow up missiles over Israel" dated Oct 16, 2023 states, "Rafael’s 100-kilowatt Iron Beam is designed to neutralize rockets, artillery and mortars, a combination known as C-RAM, as well as unmanned aerial systems, or C-UAS. It is expected to be operational in 2024 or 2025, C4ISRNET previously reported. "

The article at https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-do-videos-show-israels-iron-beam-action-1835033 states, "Reports strongly indicate that the laser system is not yet operational. An article by U.K. newspaper The Telegraph published on Monday said that the Iron Beam system, which had been scheduled to enter service in 2025, could be deployed sooner. It does not indicate that it has been deployed in current combat operations...Multiple reports state the system is still in development."

Given that information, it is highly unlikely that the engagement using Iron Beam reported with the fake video actually occurred since Iron Beam has not been deployed yet.
 


 
Very interesting.

For the MBDA LWD 2024, the second article states: "As for the firing rate, a “shot” against a UAV lasts typically 2-3 seconds, one shot every 10 seconds being the average rate of fire."

That firing rate is a severe limitation since a drone swarm or artillery barrage could easily overwhelm the LWD 2024 system. Hopefully that is the firing rate just for the demonstrator and will be increased for a full-up operational weapons system.
 
Very interesting.

For the MBDA LWD 2024, the second article states: "As for the firing rate, a “shot” against a UAV lasts typically 2-3 seconds, one shot every 10 seconds being the average rate of fire."

That firing rate is a severe limitation since a drone swarm or artillery barrage could easily overwhelm the LWD 2024 system. Hopefully that is the firing rate just for the demonstrator and will be increased for a full-up operational weapons system.
Yes but then again its a very light system design.
 
Yes but then again its a very light system design.
I think you are confusing the LWD 2024 that I am talking about with the "MILOS-D dismounted laser effector capable to be carried by few soldiers or installed on unmanned or manned ground vehicles" also mentioned in the article.

The article states the following about the LWD 2024: " The LWD 2024 volume is expected to be less than a quarter of the 20-foot standard container hosting the recently tested laser effector. The whole system has a mass of 6.5 tonnes, an MBDA representative acknowledged during the visit. Although the power generation comes from the ship propulsion, the LWD could also be operated with batteries for both naval and ground applications...

“The concept of the MBDA LWD 2024 can however integrate different sources and make use of any commercially or military available source in Europe,” the MBDA representative added. As for the firing rate, a “shot” against a UAV lasts typically 2-3 seconds, one shot every 10 seconds being the average rate of fire."

I wouldn't call 6.5 tonnes light.
 
Interesting bits regarding the failure to adapt a side mounted Laser to the AC-130J:

Your use of the phrase "the failure to adapt a side mounted Laser to the AC-130J" makes it sound like they tried to adapt the laser to the AC-130J and failed, but the article actually says that they studied that option and ruled it out because of the high turbulence the laser beam would encounter if mounted in that location. That's not a failure, but a good engineering decision, instead.

A quote from the article about this: "AFSOC has ruled out replacing the cannon with a high-energy laser currently undergoing tests and once considered for the AC-130J.

Another Air Force official, speaking on the condition of anonymity in order to talk freely, explained that placing a laser where the 105mm gun is now yields so much air turbulence that it would upset the laser’s beam. And that official threw cold water on the idea of an AC-130J one day going into battle armed with a laser.

The laser research has 'been quite a lengthy program,' the official noted. 'Our intent with [the airborne high-energy laser] right now is to continue and finish the demonstration for [the Office of the Secretary of Defense], and we will see if we are able to actually pick it up as a weapon system. Right now, it doesn’t look like we might. We just don’t know; the decision has not been made yet. But in short, the laser can’t go in where the 105[mm cannon] is.'"
 
@bcredman Not my intend to flag it as if someone failed the design. You are absolutely correct, they asserted and disregarded. Good catch.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom