The Chinese have demonstrated a laser "killer" drones

The Chinese company GuoRong showed how to defend against small drones. According to the eastpendulum.com portal, the Chinese manufacturer presented the laser air defense system of the same name.

The company presented a video showing the work of the GuoRong complex, consisting of two small trucks. One of them is equipped with a radar and an electronic jamming system, the second with an electro-optical module and a laser system. With the help of a laser, a plastic target suspended from a quadcopter was struck at first, and during the re-demonstration, the drone itself was hit.

According to the developers, the range of the radar system is 55 km, and the laser installation and the jamming system can neutralize drones and other radio-controlled air objects at an altitude of up to 600 m. GuoRong said that it has already received an order for several installations from the police and airports, reports "Warspot"

Comments

[newcomer]

not so, the Chinese are keeping pace with science.

[Chertt]

Not so, the Chinese are PR. Both in the USA and in Russia and in Europe, such developments are already 30 years old. Projects are being carried out at the scientific and theoretical level and laboratory conditions, due to their complete practical unsuitability. (weather instability, huge energy consumption, ease of counteraction)

[NEXUS]

Quote: newbie

not so, the Chinese are keeping pace with science.

There is nothing outstanding here ...

and the laser system and jamming system can neutralize drones and other radio-controlled airborne objects at a height of up to 600 m.

And if the drone flies at a height of a kilometer or more, then this setting will only show the drone to the drone, or vice versa, the drone will show it to it.

[Blackmokona]

C-400 can hit targets only up to 25 km, and if the target flies at an altitude of 26 km? What for such a system is needed? And Tor is 10 km away, the Global Hawk flies higher. To the scrap immediately

[NEXUS]

Quote: BlackMokona

C-400 can hit targets only up to 25 km, and if the target flies at an altitude of 26 km?

For this, the classification of air defense systems and their separation were invented. Under the goals of near space and the stratosphere, the S-500, respected, is being created. At the same time, the Triumph arsenal is also being modernized.

Quote: BlackMokona

The global hawk flies higher.

Global Hawk flies at an altitude of up to 20 km. And this target, in addition to interceptors, is very good for Shell-SM.

[Blackmokona]

For this, the classification of air defense systems and their separation were invented. Under the goals of near space and the stratosphere, the S-500, respected, is being created. At the same time, the Triumph arsenal is also being modernized.

And it cannot have short-range air defense covering the troops from any small martyrs of UAVs, with which ISIS and company are so rich?
And the Pantsyr SM is up to 15 km, and the Global Hawk is up to 20 km.

[NEXUS]

Quote: BlackMokona

And the Pantsyr SM is up to 15 km, and the Global Hawk is up to 20 km.

You are mistaken ... up to 15 km, this is Shell-C1 beats ... and I'm talking about a new modernization of Shell-SM, in which both the range is doubled and the height of the interception of targets.

[Lopatov]

You see, from the Chinese side these are still ordinary show-offs.
Not earlier than in early summer, the Americans dragged a similar complex based on the Stryker armored personnel carrier to Europe for "military tests." The Chinese made a fuss, and whipped up an analogue, according to the method of "we can too." On the truck, apparently they have the same problems with the energy.

Meanwhile, without noise and dust, Israeli General Robotics riveted a system of similar purpose weighing only 70 kg.

Moreover, with such a low power consumption that it can be installed on a light robotic platform
Almost the same functions as the American or Chinese version. They found UAVs using radar, began to accompany them, using REP means on the system of receiving information from global positioning satellites and on control channels. Simply, if the "client" did not accept the "soft power", an ordinary machine gun is used for destruction, for which no transcendental energy is needed.

[_Jack_]

Using an ordinary machine gun to get into a small drone is problematic only if it flew at point blank range, then yes. Somewhere there was a video of the test of the Shell-S, how many of the machine guns were not shot, so they didn’t hit the drone, I had to shoot it with a rocket

[Lopatov]

Quote: _Jack_

Using an ordinary machine gun, getting into a small drone is problematic

Yeah ... A laser, just spit ... 8)))
Actually, everything is exactly the opposite.

Quote: _Jack_

Somewhere there was a video of the test of the Shell-S, how many of the machine guns were not shot, so they didn’t hit the drone, I had to shoot it with a rocket

Like "an extra rocket was lying around, she had to shoot down"? 8)))
All in all, it was working out the actions of the "Shell" on the simulator of a cruise missile. And the exercise scenario provided for the mandatory use of rockets. And then on the Internet they thought up a bunch of everything ...

[_Jack_]

Yeah ... A laser, just spit

Spit more than once, but at its working distance it is much easier (speed of a bullet and speed of light compare).

Like "an extra rocket was lying around, she had to shoot down"?

No, not at all like that, at first they fired machine guns, and for quite some time, but they never hit, so I had to shoot down with a rocket. I personally saw the video a couple of years ago, then there was still a lot of negativity about this in the comments, such as what the automatic gun is, if they cannot get into it at all.

[Lopatov]

Quote: _Jack_

Spit more than once, but at its working distance it is much easier (speed of a bullet and speed of light compare).

And if you compare the total time? The laser must be held on target to ensure that the target is hit, this is not instantaneous. And ultralight UAVs, due to their weight, maneuver very actively, and it is very difficult to keep them

Quote: _Jack_

No, not at all, at first they fired machine guns

For starters, these are not machine guns. And "for a rather long time" they were engaged in practicing firing on small-sized targets from cannons.

[_Jack_]

And ultralight UAVs, due to their weight, maneuver very actively, and it is very difficult to keep them

For modern automatic guidance tools this is not a problem at all, even preemption does not need to be taken into account, as for small arms.

And "for a rather long time" they were engaged in practicing firing on small-sized targets from cannons.

Yes, they worked it out, worked it out, but nothing worked. Excellent firing practice with zero result. Apparently this is the point of practicing firing - never to hit the target?

[Lopatov]

Quote: _Jack_

For modern automatic guidance tools this is not a problem at all

Which brings us back to baseline. For modern guidance tools it is easy to accurately hold the laser on target for a rather long time. But less time and with much less accuracy, within the scattering ellipse, from which it is difficult.

Quote: _Jack_

Yes, they worked it out, worked it out, but nothing worked. Excellent firing practice with zero result.

And who told you that there was no result? Did class leaders report? For systems of this level, the KR simulator is a very rare target in live firing. Usually they hit on much less technological targets and outdated ATGM missiles.
And therefore, the lifetime of such a target should be used as efficiently as possible.

[_Jack_]

And who told you that there was no result?

Well, if the necessary result is never to hit the target for the sake of increasing the target's lifetime, then, yes, the result is achieved. But this is a rather strange way to train personnel.

[Nyrobsky]

Quote: BlackMokona

C-400 can hit targets only up to 25 km, and if the target flies at an altitude of 26 km?

UAV at an altitude of 26 km ?! What functions should be assigned to it in order to justify the costs? The Chinese idea itself is interesting, but financially expensive and very dependent on climatic conditions. Our men tested an electromagnetic pulse gun against drones in Syria, which operates up to two kilometers. Cheap and cheerful. At the same time, low cloud cover and fog do not greatly affect the result. If you "cross" these two systems, then maybe they will complement each other, although ..........

[Pirogov]

Quote: NEXUS

And if the drone flies at a height of a kilometer or more, then this setting will only show the drone to the drone, or vice versa, the drone will show it to it.

Hey . So the point is not who will show the figs to whom, but the fact that the Chinese comrades are not standing still. Remember how it was with the construction of ships in China, more than ten years ago, destroyers were built in Russia, and now China itself destroyers rivets at the pace of motor boats and a bunch of such examples.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Pirogov

Hey .

Quote: Pirogov

but the fact that the Chinese comrades do not stand still.

And this is not only the Chinese concern. There is widespread militarization in the world in anticipation of a large shecher. And here either you or you. Question of desire "not to be eaten"

[Muvka]

Quote: Pirogov

Quote: NEXUS

And if the drone flies at a height of a kilometer or more, then this setting will only show the drone to the drone, or vice versa, the drone will show it to it.

Hey . So the point is not who will show the figs to whom, but the fact that the Chinese comrades are not standing still. Remember how it was with the construction of ships in China, more than ten years ago, destroyers were built in Russia, and now China itself destroyers rivets at the pace of motor boats and a bunch of such examples.

And who is standing still? Name at least one country that stands still. African do not take.

[Pirogov]

Quote: Muvka

And who is standing still? Name at least one country that stands still. African do not take.

China is developing all sectors and will gradually reach a quality level in everything. It’s worth it, it’s not worth it, I don’t know, but I know that someone builds ships for decades and doesn’t draw conclusions, and someone for months. And the point is not in cheap labor, but in proper planning.

[Muvka]

Are you talking about France? Have you seen the terms, how do they make analogues of our Ashes? And how do you relate the speed of building ships and technological development? And you are sure that the Chinese vessels reach the quality of ours? Or let us begin to rivet the T-34 and outnumber the Chinese in quantity, but how to fight in such tanks in the modern world?

[newcomer]

koleegi, well, why so immediately, as a pioneer then? the same is not sewn with a bast, which I read, which I recognize. whatever it was, the Chinese issued a product. like a similar question about the fleet of the PRC, etc., they do as they can and what they can, but they do, and not PR in the press. worthy of respect, my opinion.

[RASKAT]

I would say not keeping up with science, but are being conducted on American fairy tales, all kinds of lasers, railguns, etc. Well, they burned a plastic sheet and case with a laser at a distance of several tens of meters, so what? And what is his range?
How many such complexes will need to be put on 100 kilometers of front to ensure the necessary efficiency? But how does it work on metal, but does clouds, fog and rain break through? etc.
For example, our Kraukha figachit 300-400 km, and in my opinion more than once our electronic warfare systems have proven their effectiveness in the fight against UAVs, several even put themselves on airfields. This is what I understand the effectiveness.

[newcomer]

Well, if the airport police made an order, then what are the reasons to believe that not smart people threw money away?

[Viktorfi]

There is nothing particularly new here. Only suitable for ordinary simple drones without signal encryption.

[bulvas]

Quote: Viktorfi

There is nothing particularly new here. Only suitable for ordinary simple drones without signal encryption.

Do you think if there will be signal encryption, the plastic case will withstand the heating by the laser beam and will not melt?

[Viktorfi]

The case of military war drones is not as easily damaged by a laser as plastic.

And encryption is a jamming system that does not work against an encrypted GPS signal.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Viktorfi

And encryption is a jamming system that does not work against an encrypted GPS signal.

It, possibly, cannot be replaced (ZhPS-spoofing). However, drowning is quite possible. Like control channels. What will actually be the fulfillment of the task.

[Viktorfi]

Quote: Spade

However, drowning is quite possible.

At one of the exercises, Russia failed several years ago.

There is no real information that someone drowned the gps of a military drone.

[Simon]

I think that we have the same something similar, or at least being developed!

[san4es]

Quote: Simon

I think that we have the same something similar, or at least being developed!

... The laser tank is idle

[Brother]

Hmm ... "laser tank" .... So this is a SOVIET laser tank and was developed and built in the USSR and it has nothing to do with the current vashrash.
It’s ... 30 years ago, at least it’s necessary to repeat, to say - “AT US”

[bulvas]

Quote: Breard

Hmm ... "laser tank" .... So this is a SOVIET laser tank and was developed and built in the USSR and it has nothing to do with the current vashrash.
It’s ... 30 years ago, at least it’s necessary to repeat, to say - “AT US”

Yes?

And who do you think made him, wise guy?
Some of the developers of this product, like many others, can now communicate on this site

Where are you from?

If not for "Nasharash" (our Russia, translated into Russian from ..... anyone)
I wouldn’t really learn to read / write.

So it turns out, learned on your own head ...

[Simon]

It’s interesting, but it’s possible to send an anti-ballistic missile to the laser to this unit to destroy it

[Herculesic]

Yes, at least two! !

[Herculesic]

And the Chinese, too, decided to create their own "laser"? Soviet technology fell into the wrong hands! 3D copywriters, they themselves did not invent anything new, and they created it, everything is on our backlog! !!!

[Eurodav]

Already wrote ... Look for yourself on the web, fans of laser killers wouldn’t have anything ... Are there any shifts in this segment of science? Find, tell us!

Victor Sharkov (leading expert of Moscow State University; - professor, doctor of technical sciences, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Academy of Sciences, laureate of the Kurchatov Prize, 1st degree):
"... A laser weapon is a scam, there are no successful experiments, it does not melt metal at long distances, all videos of Americans, how they shoot down targets with a laser - fakes, like weapons - are ineffective ... In the 80s it was tested on the Taimyr ship ... "

"... In the mid-80s I tried to analyze the deafening failure of full-scale tests of powerful lasers at combat ranges. I was exiled there at the direction of Academician A.M. Dykhne" for re-education and acquaintance with the real industry. "He served on a laser ship and on a for a couple of years, together with his colleague BA Tikhonov, I developed methods for analyzing the physical causes of chronic failures with gas lasers. Megawatt lasers at a distance of a mile could not even set fire to a piece of paper, the "terrible" rays were completely scattered on the way to the target. And the atmosphere here did not play the title Some unexpected factors were highlighted: very small fluctuations of the gas density of the active medium, which are practically inevitable for powerful installations, make a cheap light bulb out of a combat laser.
Average fluctuations of 1% scale reduce the laser range by about 100 times. The situation with pulsed lasers is slightly better, where this factor is weaker. And, of course, without an electric discharge, this factor weakens by an order of magnitude. Also not sugar, but still ... "

"... As a result, ten years later, the grandiose" high-power laser-poppycock "became absolutely apparent, when the" active medium generators "- the" golden buttons "- did not provide the specified range even by 1% due to the poor quality of the radiation, which was catastrophically corrupted by optical inhomogeneities The megawatt laser from the Dixon ship at a distance of 2 km could not even set fire to a piece of paper on the Crimean coast. Today I’m just formulating the physical reason for the obvious grandiose failure of the “laser bullshit”, and I had hoped before, like all specialists in generators active media, that other optical companies will somehow bring the laser beam quality to the level set by the military. They will be ordered from the CPSU Central Committee, and they will do it at a high price. It didn’t work out. It is impossible to turn a light bulb into a long-range spotlight if physical laws optics forbid it. The laws of nature are not subject to political and career "mantras" ... "

[Viktorfi]

Already read this junk. Science has advanced. Combat lasers are not only already there, but are already in use.

[Muvka]

Quote: Viktorfi

Already read this junk. Science has advanced. Combat lasers are not only already there, but are already in use.

In which conflict? What is the effectiveness? In your fantasies?

[Herculesic]

Eurodav - the man froze stupidity, the problem with long-range combat lasers is a completely different problem! And God forbid that the true reason should not be known for another half a century at least, and during this time we will really go far ahead! The problem with our jambs is that we found the real reason in the 90s! !!!

[Retvizan 8]

Yes, what do you say, the Chinese are forcing themselves to respect more and more! Such a progress!
Eighty years ago they were a backward, frightened country, and now they are becoming world leaders!

[APASUS]

This hat with lasers again! Well, let them start by coating silver on this UAV, how much will the distance of combat use be reduced ..................?

[Evgenijus]

Interestingly, the mirror facing of the drone will withstand the laser beam? The video shows the drone, almost motionless hanging in the air. And if you provide the protective lining of the drone with the ability to emit smoke (steam), when exposed to a laser, such as a smoke screen?

[Lena Petrova]

It is necessary to make small quadrocopters for search, detection, rapprochement with the drone and its detonation in the future. Right in the air. The war of cars without embellishment. :))

[BABA SHURA]

When will it appear on aliexpress? Desperately needed!