100
The U.S. Military Is Freaked: Lasers are No Secret Weapon Against Hypersonic Missiles
(nationalinterest.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
100 points (97.2% liked)
technology
23313 readers
505 users here now
On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.
Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020
- Ways to run Microsoft/Adobe and more on Linux
- The Ultimate FOSS Guide For Android
- Great libre software on Windows
- Hey you, the lib still using Chrome. Read this post!
Rules:
- 1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
- 2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
- 3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
- 4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
- 5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
- 6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
- 7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Wait, they were seriously looking into lasers for this? Because I, a non-technical person could've told you it's way cheaper to make missiles that spin, not to mention the ratio of power consumption per interception/number of cheap missiles to intercept
Yeah, you don't have to be an expert to realize this was never going to work. Just another grift by the US military industrial complex.
My non-expert opinion is there's no way you could keep a laser painted on a target manuevering at mach 13 long enough to actually melt it. How long do they even have between detection and impact? DEWs are appealing because they travel at light speed and don't need to carry ammo. ___ but you have to hold your flash light on the target until it heats up enough to fail. That's fine if you've got a cruise missile puttering along at a stately pace, but not a terminally manueverable hypersonic vehicle.
Depends!
Carrier groups usually have an AWACS plane on standby, and wikipedia suggests modern systems have a 400km detection range. Assuming the missile has a steady speed of Mach 13, that's about 90 seconds of warning.
It's more complicated than this, though, because (afaik) these missiles cruise at a much lower speed and only reach maximum velocity when accelerating in their terminal guidance phase.
There's also the issue of laser range, which would probably be not very far, closer to the hypersonic missile last phase of attack range.
Yep! Line of sight alone would limit laser countermeasures to the horizon, to say nothing of the air scattering the beam's energy for the whole distance.
But interceptors (anti-missile missiles) have no such limitation and would remain the only effective countermeasure for hypersonics.