Forum: Air Power

Will we ever see the emergence of Directed Energy Weapons in front line service? How much energy would it take to fry an Su and how much power can be generated from the aircraft that can be used in something like that? Am I as insane as I think I am? I know they have the ABL, but are smaller, nonchemical versions of the lasers ever going to be available? Could they at some point replace the gun on the aircraft? How much energy could a standard fighter aircraft actually produce without losing functionality?

Ok, enough silly questions.

F-16.net Sponsor

The Russians have this technology and utilize it on the TU-95 "Bear". Note the window blisters on the side of the fuselage. They do shoot lazers.

The US army wants to deploy a directed energy weapon right NOW in Iraq. It has been delayed until 2006 amid safety fears.

Its called the Active Denial Weapon and it uses microwave energy in the 100-Gigahertz range.

It will be mounted on a Humvee and will be called "sheriff". Its designed to be non-lethal, to be used against hostile crowds and vehicles approaching US checkpoints who don`t stop.

It actually "cooks" the skin, the pain is felt in 2 to 3 seconds. Ouch!

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

I thought those blisters were for surveilance? Or are you being sarcastic? I can't tell.

The cute answer is that there already are lasers in front line service. They just don't do damage directly. Smile

The problem with weaponized lasers is that to pump out enough energy to do damage they need to be bulky and heavy. "nonchemical" lasers, such as semiconductor lasers are nowhere near powerful enough (yet).

There are talks of putting a fairly large chemical laser in a medium lift helo (like a CH-47) and using it as a directed energy gunship. Come to think of it, it might also make sense to mount one in a C-130, a laser AC-130...

And these types of lasers aren't cheap. The THEL, which is a prototype ground based laser for tactical missile defence, costs about $3,000 per intercept.

To answer your question, we are nowhere near replacing an M61 with a laser.

That's cool we can use the lasers to shoot things down. It's $3000 for a laser intercept or what $1,000,000 for a patriot missile intercept. Would it be possible to build a smaller (less than the size of an airliner) that's able to charge an effective laser? Basicly have an AWACS with a laser cannon that continuously charges a set of batteries so there's always a possible shot. Have an airplane that doesn't need to go fast so it can leech energy from the engines so charge batteries. Maybe not an AWACS but something more meant for like cruise missile interception or lond distance aerial interception. Am I insane for thinking this stuff up? Laughing

Guysmiley - if you look closely inside the operator of the blister that is used for recon, you'll notice an apparatus that appears to be a medium sized lazer. There is a picture of a Grey Air Guard F-4 intercepting a TU-95 in many books. You'll also notice the pilot looking directly at the lazer, supposedly when intercepting a Russian Aircraft, you're supposed to use your visual periphery on one eye and a patch covering the other in case you get zapped in the optic nerve of the good eye.

LordOfBunnies wrote:

That's cool we can use the lasers to shoot things down. It's $3000 for a laser intercept or what $1,000,000 for a patriot missile intercept. Would it be possible to build a smaller (less than the size of an airliner) that's able to charge an effective laser? Basicly have an AWACS with a laser cannon that continuously charges a set of batteries so there's always a possible shot. Have an airplane that doesn't need to go fast so it can leech energy from the engines so charge batteries. Maybe not an AWACS but something more meant for like cruise missile interception or lond distance aerial interception. Am I insane for thinking this stuff up? Laughing

I actually like that idea. Sort of a last ditch self defense weapon for an AWACS. Hopefull it wouldn't need to be used, but it's a good idea.

Ultima wrote:

I actually like that idea. Sort of a last ditch self defense weapon for an AWACS. Hopefull it wouldn't need to be used, but it's a good idea.

Would that be a "Blinding laser?" I have heard that It could be used to overload the seeker of an incoming IR missile.

You would have to be DAMN accurate though!

Nothing new here. Look up http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... aaq-24.htm

Excellent link Roscoe. Was unaware that the gear was operational. Oviously it`s capabilities are classified and rightly so.

It also reduces the threat of the new ultra long range Russian IR missiles. How it would counter a missile with a dual seeker....I guess it would be used in conjunction with established radar countermeasures.

What about destructive interference? Radar is an EM wave, so it can have destructive interference that will destroy the wave that is at least in the direction of the A/C. The answer is to modulate the size of the radar wave so it's harder to counter. The answer to this is to increase the frequency and decrease the amplitude so that you're getting as much, as fast. That way when they try to modulate the frequency more, its more likely to cause destructive interference and less stuff will reach the A/C. Is this true? Or did I just state how electronic counter measures have been working for the past 50 years. At any rate, if you can fool the radar by saying something is somewhere else that might work as well.

How much heat would be required to lock a missiles internal mechanisms?

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

LordOfBunnies: Current technology does not have the capability to produce megawatt class electrically pumped lasers. All of the current (and near future) technologies rely on chemical reactions to generate the laser light. Some power is required to operate the laser obviously, but they cannot run on say, a big honking generator with unlimited ammo.

And technically, if a semiconductor laser powerful enough to be used directly as a weapon does come along, you're still having to carry the ammunition onboard (namely the fuel!) Very Happy

Think about it, megawatts of power have to come from somewhere, and if you're using generators, you're burning gas.

Lordofbunnies, the last technique you described is called "spoofing", this is deceptive ecm. The ecm device emits different frequencies that can make the missiles radar or indeed controlling radar site "see" the target "move" all over the place. Radar waves are not destroyed, active ecm techniques aim to "overpower" the signal processing components of a threat.
I am not a countermeasures expert, someone may correct me if I am wrong.
Deceptive jamming, can work like this...this example is called "cross-eye jamming"
Take any target aircraft. The target has an emitter/receiver on both wingtips. Say one wingtip pod receives a radar signal, it moves the signal forward in phase, passes the signal to the opposite wingtip which is passed back to the threat radar. At the SAME time, the second pod shifts the signal back in phase, passes it back to the other wingtip pod which transmits it back to the threat!
The phase shifted signals will make the threat radar think the signal is coming from somewhere else. If the phase shifted signals are adjusted correctly, the system can "move" the tracking radar "off" the aircraft.

Its a very complex and HUGE field. Jamming works by " overwhelming" a threat radars capacity to process the signal. Its kind of like someone talking to you but you start to shout, the other guy cannot hear his own voice. You have jammed him. If he then shouts louder than you, This is called jam "burnthrough".

Some missiles have "home on jam" capability, its like closing your eyes and smacking the guy with the loud mouth in the eye! Deceptive jamming may defeat these kind of missiles. I am sure there are guys on this forum with far more knowledge of ecm who could help, without going into classified stuff.
Emp can be used to "burn out" electronics. How much energy you need depends on the threats "EM Hardening".

On topic, (sorry keep doing that), as was mentioned, with current technology, only a ship can generate the kind of power required for any laser/particle beam weapon.(atomic powerplants). Solid state lasers have come a long way, however , railguns which fire projectiles at massive velocities are being talked about . They seem more feasible with current technology.