F-35 High Energy Laser

[Dragon029]

why would they put laser on a submarine ?

As a means to defend against UAVs, small surface vessels, aircraft, etc that are trying to track it for anti-submarine weapons / platforms. Might even be able to use it to take out glide-torpedos.

[KamenRiderBlade]

why would they put laser on a submarine ?

As a means to defend against UAVs, small surface vessels, aircraft, etc that are trying to track it for anti-submarine weapons / platforms. Might even be able to use it to take out glide-torpedos.

Why would the submarine ever be on the surface of the water other than at their home port?

The entire purpose of the submarine is to hide underwater and never surface unless they're at home or transferring personnel & supplies.

[eloise]

A lot lot more. I would suggest that you take some time and read some of the resources presented in this thread. Keep in mind that the range depends upon the sort of target and its a combination of distance and time (among others such as clouds etc) that ultimately determines destruction.r...

https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=bW ... edir_esc=y
it say here the range is about 2 km though

[eloise]

As a means to defend against UAVs, small surface vessels, aircraft, etc that are trying to track it for anti-submarine weapons / platforms. Might even be able to use it to take out glide-torpedos.

To do that the submarine must be surfaced, and be vulnerable to everything

[rotosequence]

As a means to defend against UAVs, small surface vessels, aircraft, etc that are trying to track it for anti-submarine weapons / platforms. Might even be able to use it to take out glide-torpedos.

to do that the submarine must be surfaced, and be vulnerable to everything

That's not entirely true; the laser could be placed in a pariscope, or other telescopic arrangement that allows the submarine to remain submerged. This is not to say that I endorse the proposed idea.

[bring_it_on]

A lot lot more. I would suggest that you take some time and read some of the resources presented in this thread. Keep in mind that the range depends upon the sort of target and its a combination of distance and time (among others such as clouds etc) that ultimately determines destruction.r...

https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=bW ... edir_esc=y
it say here the range is about 2 km though

It depends on the type of laser, the sort of burst you are looking at etc. The ADAM also manages 2 Km with only a 10KW fiber weapon.

Designed for short-range defense of high-value assets including forward operating bases, the ADAM system’s 10-kilowatt fiber laser is engineered to destroy targets up to 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) away.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/p ... -adam.html

The literature provides range estimations and mission estimations for different scenarios and also backs most of that up with references. Its better you search through them and check out the sources if they are provided.

This scenario - Altitude 30,000 Feet (Air to Air Engagement)

Screenshot_2015_03_31_08_48_28.png (164.13 KiB) Viewed 25815 times

As you can see at 30,000 Feet operating altitude a 100KW DEW provides 2x the POT at 12.5 miles than a 25KW DEW at 4 miles. There are other scenarios discussed and described as well.

I'll post the conclusion for the sake of those that may not wish to read the entire paper (s) -

It has been shown that there are many physical considerations in the employment of high energy solid-state laser systems aboard fighter-sized aircraft. However, with developing technology, none are insurmountable. The real question is whether or not such a system is worth the time and money spent to research, test and field these new technologies.

For the FA-18E/F, the likelihood of being able to field a thermally-managed, adequately-powered 100 kW laser system is low. And, while a 50 kW system appears (via HELEEOS simulation) to be an adequate air-to-air offensive and/or defensive weapon, its utility in the air-to-ground environment would be somewhat limited to the softer targets. Clearly, a 25 kW system will be inadequate in the air-to-ground environment. However, it could prove to be a decent defensive air-to-air weapon (in the SAM DEFENSE role) Diffraction effects make the power on target at ranges greater than 10 km too small to be effective, and thus it would have little tactical value in the offensive air-to-air role. The versatility of an HEL weapon makes it an attractive option for the warfighter. If a 50 kW or greater weapon could be fielded on an FA-18E/F, then it could prove to be a valuable asset. A 25 kW weapon, serving only as a defensive, close-range system, might be too much of a sacrifice of weapon stations and fuel carrying capacity for the Super Hornet.

The Joint Strike Fighter should be able to adequately power a 100 kW weapon. The question of cooling remains, although those technologies are under development. A 100 kW system is clearly versatile in both the air-to-air and air-to-ground environments, and this weapon would revolutionize the tactics of the aerial arena. Again, though, it will never be a standalone weapon. There will always be a need for explosive weapons and hard target penetrators to destroy certain targets. There will always be scenarios where the laser, no matter how powerful, will be relatively useless (e.g. bad weather), and thus there will always be a need for the conventional weaponry of the strike fighter.

[spazsinbad]

U.S. Air Force eyes future F-35 engine and arms upgrades
07 Apr Andrea Shalal

"(Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force is on track to declare Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter jet ready for initial combat use by August or September 2016, and officials are already looking at possible future upgrades to its weapons, propulsion and avionics.

Major General Jeffrey Harrigian, the two-star general named in January to oversee all things F-35 for the Air Force, told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday the program was making good progress, but he was keeping close tabs on key items required to meet the target date....

...He said the Air Force was already looking at follow-on capabilities for the F-35, given rapid technology development by potential adversaries, and ensuring that the infrastructure was in place to allow such upgrades.

"We are already considering and thinking through what are some of the technologies that will be part of the F-35," Harrigian said. "This is not the time to rest on your laurels."

Harrigian gave few details but said potential upgrades could include new avionics systems, radar, laser weapons and a new more fuel-efficient engine.

"I don't think we would take anything off the table at this point," he said."

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/ ... 4C20150407

[bring_it_on]

Apparently the Northrop Grumman DIRCM offering (Thndr) has an offensive A2A component as well.

Unlike its current DIRCM systems that provide defence against surface-to-air missiles and rockets, Northrop Grumman will for the first time include an air-to-air capability in its DIRCM offering.

[popcorn]

Counter-Air would be an intriguing capability if they can pull it off, providing 360-deg. spherical coverage cued by DAS.

http://archive.defensenews.com/article/ ... ion-System

...Northrop executives describe ThNDR as a “sixth-generation” system, and the company is keeping an eye on what a seventh-gen system might look like. Smith, at least, believes that would likely involve higher-powered lasers in the “tens of kilowatts of energy.”

[spazsinbad]

Some AckaDacka THUNDER

[neptune]

..tens of kilowatts of energy[/b].”

With the integration of systems on the F-35, where could you add power generation/ batteries for a H.E. laser?

F-35 160KW 270 Vdc

...or is this more probable for the LRS-B?

[Dragon029]

It'd be more probably for the LRS-B, but for the F-35 you could either add an external ram-air turbine (throw it in the multi-mission pod) or upgrade the generator in the F-35; that might include doing something like adding a second one running off the accessory gearbox (especially if the F135's alternator is located axially in the engine).

[sersi]

why would they put laser on a submarine ?

As a means to defend against UAVs, small surface vessels, aircraft, etc that are trying to track it for anti-submarine weapons / platforms. Might even be able to use it to take out glide-torpedos.

Why would the submarine ever be on the surface of the water other than at their home port?

The entire purpose of the submarine is to hide underwater and never surface unless they're at home or transferring personnel & supplies.

It doesn't have necessarily have to surface; google Blue-green lasers + submarines. The navy's been studying blue-green lasers for use as submarine sensors, comm systems, and weapons for decades. Essentially, as a sensor its an underwater ladar, with much faster propagation speed than sonar, and potentially better resolution. They've studied and tested airborne Blue-green lasers for: ASW, Comms, and mine detection that can penetrate to more than periscope depth from an aircraft. So I wouldn't expect the reverse to be a much of a problem.

[bring_it_on]

The plans on how to power any DEW (DIRCM or otherwise) and how to cool them have been shared in the articles cited in the first post in this topic. Also do note, that a couple of the ways were directly suggested to the author by the Lockheed project head working on DEWs.

[neptune]

The plans on how to power any DEW...

...not your problem, the sites are blocked to me, at this time...

...so.....can 150KW power an a/c HEL, etc. ??? ....yes or no.....inquiring minds want to know??


...if yes, will it fit (dimensionally) within the existing stealthy gun pod??


... to others...., is there "..room.." to add an additional starter/ generator (160KW) to the F-135 inside the F-35..?????