New laser defence system

[Foxbat]

This British development looks like a big step forward. The MOD has been testing a laser defence sytem used in conjunction with Thales’ Elix-IR Threat Warning System.

It works by early detection of launch and flight of missiles with the laser then used to neutralise these threats. Tested recently on a range in Sweden against multiple targets, the system achieved a success rate of 100%.

Britain’s news air defence laser downs multiple missiles

RAF aircraft will soon receive a new laser self-protection system, after successful trials proved its capability to defend against missile threats.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

Elix-IR

Elix-IR® is the world’s most advanced multi-function passive Threat Warning System (TWS), offering the core functionalities of a simultaneous Missile Approach Warner (MAW) and Hostile Fire Indication (HFI)

www.thalesgroup.com

With modern warfare currently using missiles costing anywhere close to a million pounds to deal with threats sometimes only costing a few hundred of pounds, defensive laser technology would better balance the books with each laser emission costing under one hundred pounds.
Small enough, apparently, to be fitted to a helicopter.

I wonder if it could deal with drone swarms, which I’d imagine would have a much lower infra red signature given the nature of their propulsion.

 

[BAYLOR]

I would thin that laser would are be more effective on one target at time rather then a swarm of them.

 

[Robert Zwilling]

The drones are smaller, slower, more vulnerable because it would take less energy to zap them. Being able to resolve and fire on multiple targets with proper programing could work. Rocket powered cruise missiles able to do evasive maneuvers might be harder to bring down than a drone.

 

[Foxbat]

Rocket powered cruise missiles able to do evasive maneuvers might be harder to bring down than a drone.

It doesn’t say in the article what types of targets were neutralised in the exercise but the laser will have the advantage of operating at the speed of light. It’s not very clear but it looks to me like the laser unit has multiple lenses, which might make tackling fast moving objects more efficient.

There is another system called DragonFire that is being designed and tested for use on naval vessels. This one is specifically for downing anti-ship missiles. The capability gap seems to lie in tackling hypersonic missiles. They tend to have a lot of heat shielding to protect them from the rigours of their very high speeds (around Mach 5).

 

[Robert Zwilling]

Laser weapons are becoming practical and it looks like the mechanical aspects of the laser weapons limit them more than anything else. Rain, fog and smoke scatter the light beams and diminish effectiveness; that will be interesting to see if they can get around those conditions. Keeping the laser sufficiently charged is another problem. The portable units are going to need really good generators to keep the power levels up. Maybe mini turbine powered units. Another option is to have power jacks they can plug into if they have to be moved around.

A ground position inside some kind of fort or a location on a ship could become untenable forcing the repositioning of the laser unit. To me, some of the laser units look like the huge mortars used in the US civil war. They could be very effective and had mobility. But carrying the heavy ammo around could be a problem. The power generated is part of the "ammo" the laser unit shoots.

To cover 360 degrees you need at least 3 of the units. I wonder how fast it can reposition itself to hit something 180 degrees at a different elevation. For some targets it takes 10 seconds for the laser to damage the target. That gives the unit plenty of time to generate firing solutions for new incoming targets. It also limits how many targets per minute it can hit which means you need more than 3 units to cover an area.

Without knowing the exact details of the tests, its hard to know how good they really are in a pinch. Its claimed multiple targets have been hit by one unit but were all the targets coming in on the same heading, one after another?

The hypersonic weapons apparently have some kind of extreme airflow around them. Its possible a laser could disrupt the airflow before it could damage the missile and that disruption could make the hypersonic weapon's flight unstable or at least redirect it from it's planned target.

While there is a limit as to how far away a target can be detected, all systems have that problem.

Cooling the unit is another problem for which there is little information.

The cheap rockets and drones coming on line need cheap solutions to shoot them down. The only thing providing a ten dollar a shot solution is the laser. Using million dollar or more weapons to knock down hundreds of 100,000 dollar or less weapons can be just as damaging as hitting something. Missiles from a jet can be cheap but the cost of flying the jet or losing the jet is the real cost of the cheap missile.

A far seeing satellite system and an extensive ground based radar network could supply laser weapons with plenty of advanced warning. That could be the beginning of skynet.

 

[Foxbat]

Rain, fog and smoke scatter the light beams and diminish effectiveness; that will be interesting to see if they can get around those conditions

An interesting point. I wonder if missile designers could counter laser defence by building a weapon with some kind of ‘cloud hugging’ characteristic? It might be a way to not only scatter laser but perhaps mask its infrared signature.

After writing this thought down, I went searching and, apparently, IR is affected by cloud but doesn’t affect radar. Radar is affected by rain but not by clouds so I suppose the answer would be to use a combination of both radar and IR for detection, tracking and interception. It still doesn’t solve the scatter effect of moisture on the laser but might give an earlier detection and, therefore, the opportunity for multiple attempts on a target.

Just thinking out loud

P.S. A common design for hypersonic missiles is to launch high into the atmosphere and attain the very high speeds by gliding back down to earth. This would give it an interesting flaw. The downward glide phase would mean that there is effectively a blind area where a missile could not operate - kind of like a mortar, which has a maximum and minimum range. It might be possible for a ship to avoid a hypersonic missile attack by closing the range with the launch position and getting inside the minimum range. Of course, this would then make the ship more vulnerable to other forms of attack. A good example of why multiple forms of defence are needed.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Personally, I thunk that the development of rail guns is the way forward. No problem with weather issue, electrionically propelled projectiles travelling at several times the speed of sound would put paid to most missiles/drones/planes.

It's incredible to think that a military ship with all modern technology, and costing tens or hundreds of millions to design, constrict and man can be neutralised by a drone costing a fraction of the price.

But just as submarines were seen as the potential death of surface ships, counter measures will always be found to level the playing field.

 

[Foxbat]

It's incredible to think that a military ship with all modern technology, and costing tens or hundreds of millions to design, constrict and man can be neutralised by a drone costing a fraction of the price.

This is the big problem. I think it’s also why laser development appears to be a good option. I have no idea how much a railgun slug might cost but I’ve seen laser emissions estimated at around £50 per shot on military websites. If true, a nice inexpensive solution (if it works) to a very real but also inexpensive threat.

There’s an interesting article in last month’s Warships magazine detailing the tour of duty carried out by HMS Diamond against Houthi attacks in the Red Sea. It dealt with seven drones simultaneously at one point. One was dealt with using a ‘30mm automated small calibre gun’ and it doesn’t say how the others were downed but, if it was using the Sea Viper system, then a very expensive (but effective) method. Diamond also successfully downed an anti-ship ballistic missile later on (what Sea Viper was designed to do).

Sea Viper is expensive and missile storage is limited so it becomes obvious why either a rail gun (with much smaller projectiles) or laser is so attractive for weapons developers.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Apparently the projectiles are relatively inexpensive (in military terms). A large metal dart travelling 50 miles in less than 30 seconds at MACH 8 is almost impossible to counter.

I think yhat the cheapness of drones, and especially laser powered weapons- is one of the more frightening aspects. Imagine if some modern day pirates got hold of a laser weapon - what havoc they could cause.

 

[Foxbat]

drones, and especially laser powered weapons-

I’m not sure how cheap the actual weapons platform is when it comes to lasers. The price I quoted was one emission of laser light - so running cost - if it fired ten times, it would be to a cost of five hundred (as opposed to around half a million per missile). I suspect initial cost and installation of a laser weapon would be very expensive so probably out of reach of pirates (unless a rogue state installed it for them). Also, they are very energy hungry so the boats they are using right now couldn’t possibly supply a unit.

 

[Foxbat]

Some of videos showing pros and cons