Military Review

Resist light: protection from laser weapons. Part of 5

65
Earlier we examined how to develop laser technologywhich laser weapon can be created to apply for air force, ground forces and air defense, navy.




Now we need to understand whether it is possible to defend against it, and how. Often there are statements that it is enough to cover the rocket with a mirror coating or to polish the projectile, but unfortunately, everything is not so simple.

A conventional aluminum-coated mirror reflects approximately 95% of the incident radiation, and its efficiency depends strongly on the wavelength.

Resist light: protection from laser weapons. Part of 5

Spectral reflectance of mirrors with various metal coatings


Of all the materials shown in the graph, aluminum has the highest reflectivity, which is by no means a refractory material. If the mirror heats up slightly when irradiated with low-power radiation, then when a powerful radiation hits, the material of the mirror coating will quickly become unusable, which will lead to a deterioration of its reflective properties and further avalanche-like heating and destruction.

At a wavelength of less than 200 nm, the efficiency of the mirrors drops sharply, i.e. against ultraviolet or x-ray radiation (free electron laser) such protection will not work at all.


Mirror coating damaged by laser CO2 laser


There are experimental artificial materials with 100% reflection, but they only work for a specific wavelength. Also, mirrors can be covered with special multi-layer coatings that increase their reflectivity to 99.999%. But this method also works only for a single wavelength, and incident at a certain angle.

Do not forget that the operating conditions of weapons are far from laboratory, i.e. mirror rocket or projectile will need to be stored in a container filled with inert gas. The slightest turbidity or stain, for example, from handprints, immediately worsen the reflectivity of the mirror.

The exit from the container immediately exposes the mirror surface to the environment - the atmosphere and heat exposure. If the mirror surface is not covered with a protective film, it will immediately lead to a deterioration of its reflective properties, and if it is covered with a protective coating, it will itself deteriorate the reflective properties of the surface.


Comparative reflection spectra of films of reinforced aluminum, standard aluminum and aluminum without protection


Summarizing the above, we note: mirror protection is not very well suited for protection against laser weapons. Then what is suitable?

To some extent, the method of “smearing” the thermal energy of the laser beam along the body will help by ensuring the rotational movement of the aircraft (LA) around its own longitudinal axis. But this method is only suitable for ammunition and to a limited extent for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), to a lesser extent it will be effective when irradiated with a laser in the front of the case.

On some types of protected objects, for example, on planning bombs, cruise missiles (KR), or anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM) attacking a target when flying from above, this method also cannot be applied. Non-rotating, for the most part, are mortar mines. It is difficult to collect data on all non-rotating aircraft, but I am sure that there are a lot of them.


SDB-39 and JSOW planning bombs



JASSM and 3M-14 cruise missiles



ATGM TOW2B attacking target when flying over it


In any case, the rotation of the aircraft will only slightly reduce the effect of laser radiation on the target, since the heat transferred by the powerful laser radiation to the hull will be transferred to the internal structures and further along all the components of the aircraft.

The use of fumes and aerosols as countermeasures against laser weapons also has limited capabilities. As already mentioned in the articles of the series, the use of lasers against ground-based armored vehicles or ships is possible only when used against surveillance equipment, which we will return to protection. Burn the BMP case /tank or surface ship with a laser beam in the foreseeable future is unrealistic.

Of course, it is impossible to apply smoke or aerosol protection against aircraft. Due to the high speed of the aircraft, the smoke or aerosol will always be blown back by the oncoming air pressure, for helicopters they will be blown away by the air flow from the propeller.

Thus, protection against laser weapons in the form of sprayed fumes and aerosols may be required only on lightly armored vehicles. On the other hand, tanks and other armored vehicles are often equipped with standard smoke screen systems to disrupt the enemy’s weapons systems, and in this case, when developing appropriate fillers, they can also be used to counteract laser weapons.


Elements of the complex of active protection (KAZ) "Afganit", intended for the production of protective curtains, promising tank T-14 based on the platform "Armata"


Returning to the protection of optical and thermal imaging intelligence, we can assume that the installation of optical filters that prevent the passage of laser radiation of a certain wavelength, suitable only at the initial stage to protect against low-power laser weapons, for the following reasons:

- in service will be a large range of lasers from different manufacturers operating at different wavelengths;

- a filter designed to absorb or reflect a certain wavelength when exposed to high-power radiation is likely to fail, which will either lead to laser radiation on sensitive elements, or failure of the optics itself (clouding, distortion of the image);

- Some lasers, in particular, a free electron laser, can change the working wavelength in a wide range.

Optical and thermal imaging reconnaissance can be protected for ground equipment, ships and aviation equipment by installing high-speed shields. If laser radiation is detected, the protective screen should close the lenses in fractions of a second, but even this does not guarantee the absence of damage to sensitive elements. It is possible that the widespread use of laser weapons over time will require at least duplication of intelligence in the optical range.

If on large carriers the installation of protective screens and duplicating means of optical and thermal imaging intelligence is quite realizable, then on high-precision weapons, especially compact sizes, it is much more difficult to do. First, the weight and size requirements for protection are significantly tightened, and secondly, exposure to high-power laser radiation, even with the shutter closed, can cause the optical system components to overheat due to dense layout, which will lead to partial or complete disruption of its operation.


American ATGM “Javelin”, Russian “Verba” MANPADS and a short-range missile RVV-MD are the most vulnerable targets for laser weapons


What are the ways to effectively protect equipment and weapons from laser weapons? There are two main methods - ablation protection and structural heat insulation protection.

The ablative protection (from the Latin ablatio - removal, mass carryover) is based on the substance carried off from the surface of the protected object by a flow of hot gas and / or on the rearrangement of the boundary layer, which in total significantly reduces heat transfer to the protected surface. In other words, the incoming energy is spent on heating, melt, and evaporation of the protecting material.

At the moment, ablative protection is actively used in the launching modules of spacecraft (SC) and in the nozzles of jet engines. The most widely used are plastic materials based on phenolic, silicone, and other synthetic resins containing carbon (including graphite), silica (silica, quartz), and nylon as fillers.


Ablative Protection Scheme


Ablative protection is one-time, heavy and bulky, so it makes no sense to use it on reusable aircraft (read not all manned, and most of the unmanned aircraft). Its only use is on guided and unguided projectiles. And here the main question is what thickness should be the protection for a laser power, for example, 100 kW, 300 kW, etc.

On the Apollo spacecraft, the protection thickness ranges from 8 to 44 mm for temperatures from several hundred to several thousand degrees. Somewhere in this range will lie the required thickness of the ablative protection against combat lasers. It is easy to imagine how it will affect the weight and size characteristics, and, consequently, the range, maneuverability, weight of the warhead (CU) and other parameters of the ammunition. The ablative thermal protection must also withstand overloads during launch and maneuvering, and must comply with the norms of terms and conditions of storage of ammunition.


Ablation protection of the Buran spacecraft in the context


Uncontrolled ammunition is under question, since the uneven destruction of the ablative protection from laser radiation can change the external ballistics, as a result of which the ammunition deviates from the target. If the ablative protection is already used somewhere, for example, in hypersonic ammunition, then its thickness will have to be increased.

Another method of protection is constructive coating or housing design with several protective layers of refractory materials that are resistant to external influences.

If we draw an analogy with spacecraft, then we can consider the thermal protection of the reusable Buran spacecraft. In areas where the surface temperature is 371 - 1260 degrees Celsius, a coating was applied consisting of amorphous silica fiber 99,7% purity, to which is added a binder - colloidal silicon dioxide. The coating is made in the form of tiles of two sizes with thickness from 5 to 64 mm.

Borosilicate glass containing a special pigment (white coating based on silicon oxide and shiny alumina) is applied to the outer surface of the tiles in order to obtain a small absorption coefficient of solar radiation and a high emission coefficient. Ablation protection was used on the nose fairing and the toes of the wing of the apparatus, where temperatures exceed 1260 degrees.

It should be borne in mind that during long-term operation, the protection of tiles against moisture may be impaired, which will lead to the loss of thermal protection of their properties, so it cannot be directly used as an anti-laser protection on reusable aircrafts.


Spaceship "Buran". White and black tiles - reusable heat protection, black elements of the nose and wing edges - ablative heat protection



The thickness of the thermal protection of the spacecraft "Buran" depending on temperature


At the moment, a promising ablative thermal protection is being developed with minimal surface wear, which protects aircraft from temperature to 3000 degrees.

A group of scientists from the Royce Institute at the University of Manchester (UK) and the Central Southern University (China) developed a new material with improved characteristics that can withstand temperatures up to 3000 ° C without structural changes. This is a Zr0.8Ti0.2C0.74B0.26 ceramic coating that is superimposed on the carbon-carbon composite matrix. According to its characteristics, the new coating significantly exceeds the best high-temperature ceramics.

The chemical structure of heat-resistant ceramics itself plays the role of a protective mechanism. At temperature 2000 ° C, Zr0.8Ti0.2C0.74B0.26 and SiC materials oxidize and turn into Zr0.80T0.20O2, B2O3 and SiO2, respectively. Zr0.80Ti0.20O2 partially melts and forms a relatively dense layer, and oxides with a low melting point of SiO2 and B2O3 evaporate. At a higher temperature 2500 ° C, Zr0.80Ti0.20O2 crystals melt into larger formations. At 3000 ° C, an almost completely dense outer layer is formed, mainly consisting of Zr0.80Ti0.20O2, zirconium titanate and SiO2.


The dark gray surface of the material before testing, as well as the surface after two minutes of testing at 2000 ° C and 2500 ° C. In the center of the right sample is the area where the flame temperature reached 3000 ° C


The world is developing and special coatings designed to protect against laser radiation.

A representative of the People’s Liberation Army of China, back in 2014, said that American lasers do not pose a particular danger to Chinese military equipment sheathed with a special protective layer. There are only questions left: what kind of power, from lasers, does this coating protect, and which has thickness and mass.

Of greatest interest is the coating developed by American researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the University of Kansas - an aerosol composition based on a mixture of carbon nanotubes and special ceramics that can effectively absorb laser light. Nanotubes of the new material uniformly absorb light and transfer heat to nearby areas, reducing the temperature at the point of contact with the laser beam. Ceramic high-temperature joints provide the protective coating with high mechanical strength and resistance to high temperature damage.

During the tests, a thin layer of material was deposited on the copper surface and, after drying, focused a beam of a long-wave infrared laser, a laser used for cutting metal and other hard materials, on the material surface.

Analysis of the collected data showed that the coating successfully absorbed 97.5 percent of the laser beam energy and without failure sustained the energy level in 15 kW per square centimeter of surface.

On this coating, the question arises: in testing, the protective coating was applied to the copper surface, which itself is one of the most difficult materials to be treated with a laser, because of its high thermal conductivity, it is unclear how it will behave such a protective coating with other materials. Also, there are questions about its maximum temperature resistance, resistance to vibration and shock loads, exposure to atmospheric conditions and ultraviolet radiation (sun). Not specified time during which the exposure was carried out.

Another interesting point: if the aircraft engines are also covered with a substance with high thermal conductivity, then the whole body will be uniformly heated from them, which unmasks the aircraft in the thermal spectrum to the maximum.


The cutting speed of copper is the smallest of all metals in the table due to the high thermal conductivity; perhaps, the developers of the protective material did not accidentally choose this material as a substrate for testing, trying to inflate the characteristics of their design


In any case, the characteristics of the above aerosol protection will be in direct proportion to the size of the protected object. The larger the protected object and the coverage area, the more energy can be scattered over the area and given in the form of thermal radiation and cooling by the oncoming air flow. The smaller the protected object, the thicker you will have to do protection, because a small area will not allow enough heat to be diverted and the internal structural elements will be overheated.

The use of protection from laser radiation, whether ablative or constructive insulating, can reverse the tendency to reduce the size of guided ammunition, significantly reducing the effectiveness of both guided and non-guided munitions.

All bearing surfaces and controls - wings, stabilizers, steering wheels, have to be made from expensive and difficult to process refractory materials.

Separately, the question arises on the protection of radar detection equipment. On the experimental spacecraft "BOR-5" radio transparent thermal protection was tested - fiberglass with silica filler, but I could not find its thermal protection and weight and size characteristics.

It is still unclear whether, as a result of irradiation of radomes of reconnaissance radar tools with high-power laser radiation, even with protection from thermal radiation, a high-temperature plasma formation can appear that interferes with the passage of radio waves, as a result of which the target may be lost.

To protect the case, it will be possible to use a combination of several protective layers - heat-resistant, low heat-conducting from the inside and reflective-heat-resistant-high heat-conducting from the outside. It is also possible that materials will be applied on top of the protection from laser radiation to ensure stealth, which cannot withstand laser radiation, and will have to be restored after receiving damage from a laser weapon if the aircraft itself has survived.

It can be assumed that the improvement and widespread use of laser weapons will require the provision of laser protection against all available ammunition, both guided and unguided, as well as manned and unmanned aerial vehicles.

The introduction of laser-free protection will inevitably lead to an increase in the cost and weight and size characteristics of guided and unguided munitions, as well as manned and unmanned aerial vehicles.


In conclusion, we can mention one of the developed methods of active counteraction to a laser attack. The company Adsys Controls, located in California, is developing a protective system Helios, which should bring down the enemy's laser guidance.

When you hover the enemy's combat laser on the protected Helios device, it determines its parameters: power, wavelength, pulse frequency, direction and distance to the source. In the future, Helios prevents the enemy's laser beam from focusing on the target, presumably by aiming the oncoming low-energy laser beam, which confuses the enemy's guidance system. Detailed characteristics of the Helios system, the stage of its development and its practical performance are still unknown.
Author:
Photos used:
nanonewsnet.ru, habr.com, tydexoptics.com, findpatent.ru, popmech.ru, bastion-karpenko.ru, epizodsspace.airbase.ru, buran.ru
Articles from this series:
Laser weapons: technology, history, status, prospects. Part of 1
Laser weapons: prospects in the air force. Part of 2
Laser weapons: ground forces and air defense. Part of 3
Laser weapons: navy. Part of 4
65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Horse, people and soul
    Horse, people and soul April 7 2019 18: 51
    +1
    There are experimental artificial materials with 100% reflection.


    I thought that the "absolute reflector" exists only in the world of science fiction writers ("The Land of Crimson Clouds" A. and B. Strugatsky)

    I read about experimental material "in reverse", absorbing almost 100%. This surface is made up of hollow "black" spheres with a hole outward. Once in the hole, the light did not come out. Nearly.
    1. SRC P-15
      SRC P-15 April 7 2019 19: 00
      +5
      I wonder how a laser beam works in heavy rain? And we know how to cause showers - the residents of the Moscow region will not let you lie: "after the clouds disperse" for the holidays in Moscow, it rains in the region for several days. sad
      Your laser will not be able to beam
      Punch Moscow terrible clouds! yes
      1. Horse, people and soul
        Horse, people and soul April 7 2019 19: 28
        +5
        The battlefield for the laser is above the clouds and in space. Everything below the clouds is only available to the X-ray laser, at whose expense I am not sure that it exists at all.
        1. SRC P-15
          SRC P-15 April 7 2019 19: 40
          +1
          Quote: Horse, lyudovѣd and soulѣlyub
          The battlefield for the laser is above the clouds and in space. Everything below the clouds is only available to the X-ray laser, at whose expense I am not sure that it exists at all.

          But what about the use of a laser in the navy and in the land forces? Yes, and airplanes can fly in thick clouds (as well as cruise missiles) - then the laser can not get them either from the earth or from space. recourse We'll have to remember our native air defense and air defense missile systems. yes
          1. Shopping Mall
            April 7 2019 20: 23
            +2
            Quote: SRC P-15
            Quote: Horse, lyudovѣd and soulѣlyub
            The battlefield for the laser is above the clouds and in space. Everything below the clouds is only available to the X-ray laser, at whose expense I am not sure that it exists at all.

            But what about the use of a laser in the navy and in the land forces? Yes, and airplanes can fly in thick clouds (as well as cruise missiles) - then the laser can not get them either from the earth or from space. recourse We'll have to remember our native air defense and air defense missile systems. yes


            There are many examples in history when a particular weapon depended on the weather. You can swing a sword in any weather conditions, and in a thick fog with a sniper rifle you can not shoot anyone, but this is not a reason to change a rifle with a sword.

            Quite recently, by historical standards, rockets in-in could not be aimed at a target against the background of the earth, only at a contrast target (against the sky), but they were not abandoned, refined, and now we are talking about whether a close air battle is possible. basically.
      2. Shopping Mall
        April 7 2019 20: 20
        +2
        Quote: SRC P-15
        I wonder how a laser beam works in heavy rain? And we know how to cause showers - the residents of the Moscow region will not let you lie: "after the clouds disperse" for the holidays in Moscow, it rains in the region for several days. sad
        Your laser will not be able to beam
        Punch Moscow terrible clouds! yes


        From a military point of view, this is a very inert and non-linear phenomenon, in other words it is difficult to predict. In order to cause rain, they pour silver iodide in tons, in my opinion, in combat conditions it is difficult to implement.
    2. Shopping Mall
      April 7 2019 20: 18
      +1
      Quote: Horse, people and soul
      There are experimental artificial materials with 100% reflection.


      I thought that the "absolute reflector" exists only in the world of science fiction writers ("The Land of Crimson Clouds" A. and B. Strugatsky)

      I read about experimental material "in reverse", absorbing almost 100%. This surface is made up of hollow "black" spheres with a hole outward. Once in the hole, the light did not come out. Nearly.


      Now there are a lot of experiments with metamaterials, the properties of which are due to their structure, not their composition. In the future, they can make a revolution in science and technology.
    3. Locksmith
      Locksmith April 7 2019 21: 18
      +1
      Quote: Horse, lyudovѣd and soulѣlyub
      I read about experimental material "in reverse", absorbing almost 100%. This surface is made up of hollow "black" spheres with a hole outward. Once in the hole, the light did not come out. Nearly.

      This material is called epoxy resin glass fiber. wink , or another filler such as carbon fiber, but the fact is that laser cutting is extremely poor.
    4. Avior
      Avior April 8 2019 00: 33
      0
      for optical fiber, the internal reflection from the walls is close to 100 percent
  2. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I April 7 2019 18: 52
    +1
    The use of protection from laser radiation, whether ablative or constructive insulating, can reverse the tendency to reduce the size of guided ammunition, significantly reducing the effectiveness of both guided and non-guided munitions. Since this has already been read in the previous works of the Author, then, perhaps, his words can be interpreted as follows: the protection will take away from the ammunition so much "dimensions" that there will be "figurines" for explosives! wink I want to remind the distinguished Author about 2 "newest" concepts: 1. swarm tactics for mini-UAVs; and 2. "fire storm" in artillery ... the "essence" is as follows: a certain number of "low-power" ammunition "at once" attacks the target ... Another suggestion: the leader missiles ... "laser-resistant"! Designed to "clear" paths for "traditional" missiles ... striking enemy laser weapons by targeting the weapon's combat laser beam. No need to change the entire arsenal and create "heavy, oversized, highly protected, but low-power" ammunition! It is enough to create special, highly protected "anti-laser" leader missiles! At the same time, the modernization of the "old" missiles is not excluded in order to give a relatively cheap, "size-saving" anti-laser protection "class 1" (!) .. as in body armor ... 1st class ... 5th class .. It turns out, a kind of "reincarnation" of the previous aviation tactics: aviation with anti-missile missiles destroys formidable air defense systems, "knocks down" the "harmonious" air defense system and ... "blissful"! In this case, the same aviation, for example, clears its way with "anti-laser" missiles ... suppresses the "laser" air defense and punishes the foe with "traditional" weapons ..
    PS Eh, "said" something else, but there is no time!
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 7 2019 20: 49
      +2
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      The use of protection from laser radiation, whether ablative or constructive insulating, can reverse the tendency to reduce the size of guided ammunition, significantly reducing the effectiveness of both guided and non-guided munitions. Since this has already been read in the previous works of the Author, then, perhaps, his words can be interpreted as follows: the protection will take away from the ammunition so much "dimensions" that there will be "figurines" for explosives! wink


      PMSM will decrease efficiency in 1,5-2 times.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      I want to remind the distinguished Author about 2 "newest" concepts: 1. swarm tactics for mini-UAVs; and 2. "fire storm" in artillery ... the "essence" is this: a certain number of "low-power" ammunition "at once" attacks the target ...


      Air defense overload is a sensible tactic, but not cheap. Too "mini" UAVs can not be protected, they will burn from the laser like matches, and it is possible that they will be bent from electronic warfare equipment.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Another suggestion: Leader missiles ... "laser-resistant"! Designed to "clear" paths for "traditional" missiles ... striking enemy laser weapons by targeting the weapon's combat laser beam. No need to change the entire arsenal and create "heavy, oversized, highly protected, but low-power" ammunition! It is enough to create special, highly protected "anti-laser" leader missiles!


      The laser should not be alone, it should interact with the air defense system. Such a cool and expensive rocket can and shoot down wink

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      At the same time, the modernization of the "old" missiles is not excluded in order to give a relatively cheap, "size-saving" anti-laser protection "class 1" (!) .. as in body armor ... 1st class ... 5th class .. It turns out, a kind of "reincarnation" of the previous aviation tactics: aviation with anti-missile missiles destroys formidable air defense systems, "knocks down" the "harmonious" air defense system and ... "blissful"! In this case, the same aviation, for example, clears its way with "anti-laser" missiles ... suppresses the "laser" air defense and punishes the foe with "traditional" weapons ..
      PS Eh, "said" something else, but there is no time!


      In any case, one way or another, you have to get used to lasers, and somehow adapt against them. Actually, with a series of articles, I tried to convey the idea that laser weapons are not fiction from "Star Wars", but a close reality, which, in my opinion, is very clearly shown by the work of the Rheinmetall company. They work very consistently and show all the intermediate stages. I would not be surprised at all that their complexes would end up in Israel if their own developments stalled.

      And so - a shield and a sword!
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I April 8 2019 03: 56
        +1
        One feels that the esteemed Author is well prepared to repel the "raids of the barbarians"! Or .... dressed in a "bulletproof vest" and with a bat in hand, like an experienced batter ready to hit all the "balls"! But, nevertheless, I will try to pour mineral water into the glass of champagne for the Author ... 1.
        Quote: AVM
        Air defense overload is a sensible tactic, but not cheap. Too "mini" UAVs can not be protected, they will burn from the laser like matches, and it is possible that they will be bent from electronic warfare equipment.

        Not cheap ... yes it is. But haven't you noticed how expensive weapons are in the "last few decades"? How much did a tank or an aircraft from WW2 cost, and how much did the F-16, Cy-30/35, F-35, Cy-57 cost? How much did the SS-10 cost and how much does the Javelin cost? And what is "interesting" ... in the end, the military and the state "get used" to it! But hoping that the attacking ammunition will "burn like matches" from the laser and bend like flies from electronic warfare is not a 100% guaranteed thing! Because it is not tested! And it turns out that these are "unfounded" statements! wink (even more so ... I mean not only mini-UAVs, but also high-speed missiles, shells (HVR), using "swarm tactics" ... simultaneous attack from several directions.
        2.
        Quote: AVM
        The laser should not be alone, it should interact with the air defense system. Such a cool and expensive rocket can and shoot down

        Duc, and "anti-laser" missiles will not be alone, but in a company with anti-radar missiles! And the "traditional" electronic warfare will be applied! And "special anti-laser" attack aircraft equipped with "anti-laser" missiles and "defensive" lasers will be accompanied by electronic warfare aircraft and carriers of anti-missile missiles ... And "anti-aircraft missile" air defense aviation, "at least" has learned to overcome! And the "showdown" between Syria and Israel shows this ...
        3. mirror rocket or projectile will need to be stored in a container filled with inert gas. The slightest turbidity or stain, for example, from handprints, immediately worsen the reflectivity of the mirror.

        The exit from the container immediately exposes the mirror surface to the environment - the atmosphere and heat exposure. If the mirror surface is not covered with a protective film, it will immediately lead to a deterioration of its reflective properties, and if it is covered with a protective coating, it will itself deteriorate the reflective properties of the surface.
        In the commentary to the previous article, I opposed mirror protection ... now we are in favor ...
        A "mirror" rocket does not have to be stored in a "container with gas" ... a thin "case-casing" shell (and possibly more than one!) Can be used. And to drop the "cover" not immediately after launch, but in flight: a) on command; b) programmed; c) by the sensor ... d) in case of damage by the laser (when there is more than one shell ...)
        4. There are experimental artificial materials with 100% reflection, but they only work for a specific wavelength. But now "non-tunable" lasers with one fixed wavelength are also used ... Again ... "multi-wavelength" protective shells - "covers" ...
        5.Of course, it is impossible to apply smoke or aerosol protection against aircraft. Due to the high speed of the aircraft, the smoke or aerosol will always be blown back by the oncoming air pressure, for helicopters they will be blown away by the air flow from the propeller. I propose: a) to dilute the combat "order" of combat missiles with simulator-traps with smoke (aerosol-forming) "warheads". Such "smoke generators" take turns (in two or several bursts ...) moving forward, they work, forming a smoke (aerosol) protection ... (albeit short-term, but repeatedly ...). b) creating a smoke screen at the laser position; c) the creation of artificially low dense clouds in the area of ​​laser disposition ...
        PS Phew! I'm already tired! You're right ! Everything you and I have said can be summed up in one short phrase: "competition" between sword and shield! hi
      2. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh April 8 2019 14: 33
        0
        "The laser should not be alone, it should interact with the SAM" ////
        ----
        That's right. The laser will be integrated into the LMS of the SAM with a common radar.
        Comp will automatically decide whether to shoot: a beam or a rocket.
      3. psiho117
        psiho117 April 8 2019 18: 42
        0
        Quote: AVM
        In any case, one way or another, but you have to get used to the lasers, and somehow adapt against them.

        That's it, and I also say that the era of penny RPGs and air defense systems, burning super-expensive targets - is coming to an end. In the future, significant tricks will be required to overcome active and passive defense systems (tanks, for example).
        Armored vehicles become very expensive, and aviation in general will remain the lot of only the most advanced powers.

        Regarding the laser’s ability to shoot down ordinary cast-iron shells, especially during salvo firing, I still have very big doubts ... hi
  3. Horse, people and soul
    Horse, people and soul April 7 2019 18: 59
    0
    And if the device moves in a plasma cloud? Can a laser do him notable damage?

    It does not have to be a natural plasma cloud around a hypersonic device. This may be a plasma generated by a device in the device itself, moving at a slower speed.
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 7 2019 20: 40
      0
      Quote: Horse, people and soul
      And if the device moves in a plasma cloud? Can a laser do him notable damage?

      It does not have to be a natural plasma cloud around a hypersonic device. This may be a plasma generated by a device in the device itself, moving at a slower speed.


      Which side? How to close the whole apparatus with plasma and what intensity? What to do with its ablation by air flow? How to see / guide through it?
      1. Horse, people and soul
        Horse, people and soul April 7 2019 21: 12
        -1
        Sweat the idea that you can generate plasma like an air cavity, like in the Shkval rocket. The squall flies through the water using an air cavity. The atmospheric apparatus flies in a less dense medium using plasma instead of a cavity.

        How to manage is a big problem, unless you drag along some long antenna wire.

        Everything is very theoretical, purely speculative and completely from a NON-Specialist.
        1. psiho117
          psiho117 April 8 2019 20: 46
          0
          Quote: Horse, lyudovѣd and soulѣlyub
          How to manage is a big problem, unless you drag along some long antenna wire.

          Will burn. And if it is made heat-resistant, then either the weight will be excessive, or it will become impervious to signal reception.
  4. bk0010
    bk0010 April 7 2019 19: 56
    +1
    Phrase
    Summarizing the above, we note: mirror protection is not very suitable for protection against laser weapons

    completely incompatible with
    An ordinary aluminum-coated mirror reflects approximately 95% of the incident radiation

    Increasing the required beam power 20 times is awesome!
    Of all the materials shown in the graph, the highest reflectance of aluminum, which is by no means a refractory material
    Do not care: it is needed only to form a mirror, under it ablation armor.
    At a wavelength of less than 200 nm, the efficiency of the mirrors drops sharply, i.e. against ultraviolet or x-ray radiation (free electron laser) such protection will not work at all.

    - in service will be a large range of lasers from different manufacturers operating at different wavelengths;
    We read about "atmosphere transparency windows". Weapon lasers will have wavelengths from 0,3 microns to 1,5-2 microns, otherwise you will simply heat the air.
    In any case, the rotation of the aircraft will only slightly reduce the effect of laser radiation on the target, since the heat transferred by the powerful laser radiation to the hull will be transferred to the internal structures and further along all the components of the aircraft.
    The rotation of the aircraft will not allow the beam to act on the bare body, substituting all new layers of ablative armor.
    Of course, it is impossible to apply smoke or aerosol protection against aircraft.
    Against - of course it is impossible, for the benefit - it is possible. Air parades watched? There, with the smoke from airplanes, all sorts of figures are drawn to the whole sky. What prevents the same crap to attach a cruise missile to the nose and turn it on when the radiation detector is triggered?
    Ablation protection is disposable, heavy and voluminous, so it makes no sense to use it on reusable aircraft (read not all manned, and most unmanned aerial vehicles).
    The task is not to survive the entire flight under the influence of radiation, the task is to survive the 1-2 pulse, after which either the flight will end (for missiles and projectiles) or active means of protection will work (such as curtains). That is, ablative armor is reusable, cheap and light (even from tin, if only the case would cool when evaporating), perhaps instead of paint.
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 7 2019 20: 32
      +1
      Quote: bk0010
      Increasing the required beam power 20 times is awesome!


      The idea is that the remaining 5% instantly spoil the mirror, and then the process develops like an avalanche. And also, if it is covered with something, then the coating also deteriorates, or immediately after the start the mirror pokes the atmosphere.

      Quote: bk0010
      Do not care: it is needed only to form a mirror, under it ablation armor.


      What kind of mirror? It will melt from the first impulse. It makes no sense to mirror the ablative protection.

      Quote: bk0010
      We read about "atmosphere transparency windows". Weapon lasers will have wavelengths from 0,3 microns to 1,5-2 microns, otherwise you will simply heat the air.


      The density of the atmosphere varies with altitude, the highest density is less than a kilometer from the ground, then the laser is much simpler when it comes to airplanes.

      Quote: bk0010
      The rotation of the aircraft will not allow the beam to act on the bare body, substituting all new layers of ablative armor.


      If it is. About that and the speech that it should be put on all ammunition and how it will affect. And not everything can be rotated.

      Quote: bk0010
      Against - of course it is impossible, for the benefit - it is possible. Air parades watched? There, with the smoke from airplanes, all sorts of figures are drawn to the whole sky. What prevents the same crap to attach a cruise missile to the nose and turn it on when the radiation detector is triggered?


      Rocket speed Everything will fly back.

      Quote: bk0010
      The task is not to survive the entire flight under the influence of radiation, the task is to survive the 1-2 pulse, after which either the flight will end (for missiles and projectiles) or active means of protection will work (such as curtains). That is, ablative armor is reusable, cheap and light (even from tin, if only the case would cool when evaporating), perhaps instead of paint.


      It would be so simple, then "Soyuz" would be wrapped in tin, but no, they are busy with tiles made of graphite-graphite materials.
      1. bk0010
        bk0010 April 7 2019 22: 53
        -1
        Quote: AVM
        The point is that the remaining 5% will instantly ruin the mirror, and then the process develops like an avalanche.
        Spoiled the mirror, I agree. What process develops further? Or do you think that a cw laser will be involved in interception? After the shot, the laser needs to cool and charge the capacitors. In order to use a damaged mirror, one does not have to get into a projectile, but in the vicinity of the same point on a moving target in an imperfect atmosphere, which is problematic.
        Quote: AVM
        What kind of mirror? It will melt from the first impulse. It makes no sense to mirror the ablative protection.
        And God bless her, let it melt, we just need to slip through the area of ​​laser air defense, it's seconds. If you make such ablation armor as you described, then it may not be necessary, but if the simplest, cheapest, then attenuation of the beam by 20 times is useful.
        Quote: AVM
        The density of the atmosphere varies with altitude, the highest density is less than a kilometer from the ground, then the laser is much simpler when it comes to airplanes.
        Are you writing about ground-based air defense or about an air-based laser? If it’s about the ground, then a drop in air density will not help him: the beam will begin to turn air into plasma at low altitudes, it simply won’t reach large ones.
        Quote: AVM
        Rocket speed Everything will fly back.
        Let it fly. While the smoke generator is working, the rocket carcass will be covered, and it can work for minutes. We don’t need so long - we’ll slip through the affected area faster (the laser only works in direct line of sight). If we defend a high-flying aircraft, then it can not only drag a supply of smoke generators, but also simply throw a rocket, the main thing is to survive the first exposure.
        Quote: AVM
        It would be so simple, then "Soyuz" would be wrapped in tin, but no, they are busy with tiles made of graphite-graphite materials.
        The descent block goes in plasma for minutes, dissipating colossal energy. Our task is much simpler: not to allow the apparatus to heat up to a loss of structural strength by 1-2 hits, there you can get off much cheaper (IMHO, of course).
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh April 8 2019 14: 39
          0
          "shot the laser needs to cool down and charge the capacitors" ////
          ----
          The capacitors are discharged (and charged) in turn, with a high "rate of fire" impulses. No time is needed to cool down the laser - efficiency lasers have grown a lot,
          heat loss decreased.
          1. bk0010
            bk0010 April 8 2019 15: 59
            0
            To charge capacitors with a high rate of fire, you need a lot of energy. Do you have a power station with you or is there some kind of diesel generator?
            Even if the efficiency has been increased to 50%, in order to get 100 kW at the output (not on the target, but at the output) you need to carefully (because it’s not a steam boiler, but a complex product) dissipate 200 kW of heat, so that there are no distortions caused by uneven cooling, that is, pouring liquid nitrogen over is not an option.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh April 8 2019 16: 08
              0
              "You have a power plant with you" ////
              ----
              Yes. On large warships, on which they begin to mount short-range air defense / missile defense lasers, provide power
              for energy-intensive weapons.
              For ground-based air defense, power supply is placed in the volume of a standard sea container.
              1. psiho117
                psiho117 April 8 2019 19: 06
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                On large warships on which lasers of the near air defense / missile defense system begin to be mounted, power stations are provided

                on ships the laser is NOT NECESSARY. The fact that he can shoot down (plastic airplanes) is not dangerous for the ship, and generally it does not apply to the ship.
                And even a subsonic CRP, knock the penetrating warhead, the laser stupidly can not.
                In addition, a sea-based laser beam catastrophically scatters in the humid salty air, even in clear weather.
                In ground defense air power is placed in the amount of a standard sea container

                no matter in what volume, it is important where these, (simultaneously singled out!) 100-200 kW go. And then another impulse. and more, and more, and more.
                It is impossible to splash out, it is impossible to carry an industrial refrigerator with an ammonia tank behind you.
                That's where?
                ZY for some reason this question is overlooked, and he, in fact, is one of the most fundamental. Let me remind you that, for example, the cooling system of the Laser Boeing - could not cope with its task, and the shooting down of two targets in a row caused him great difficulties.
                And there the dimensions were wow, where there is a "standard sea container".
                1. Shopping Mall
                  April 8 2019 20: 16
                  0
                  Quote: psiho117
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  On large warships on which lasers of the near air defense / missile defense system begin to be mounted, power stations are provided

                  on ships the laser is NOT NECESSARY. The fact that he can shoot down (plastic airplanes) is not dangerous for the ship, and generally it does not apply to the ship.
                  And even a subsonic CRP, knock the penetrating warhead, the laser stupidly can not.
                  In addition, a sea-based laser beam catastrophically scatters in the humid salty air, even in clear weather.
                  In ground defense air power is placed in the amount of a standard sea container

                  no matter in what volume, it is important where these, (simultaneously singled out!) 100-200 kW go. And then another impulse. and more, and more, and more.
                  It is impossible to splash out, it is impossible to carry an industrial refrigerator with an ammonia tank behind you.
                  That's where?
                  ZY for some reason this question is overlooked, and he, in fact, is one of the most fundamental. Let me remind you that, for example, the cooling system of the Laser Boeing - could not cope with its task, and the shooting down of two targets in a row caused him great difficulties.
                  And there the dimensions were wow, where there is a "standard sea container".



                  Laser boeing is an outdated technology, very specific.

                  And how are mobile GTPPs or powerful diesel generators cooled? Or a gas turbine in a tank power 1500 hp? In the atmosphere you can come up with something.

                  Diesel on a trailer from 100 kW - http://www.profpower.ru/product/peredvizhnoj-dizelnyj-generator-tss-prof-ed-100-t400-2rpm5-v-kozhuhe-s-avr/

                  400 kW - http://www.brizmotors.ru/equipment/mobile_gensets/

                  There are more powerful ones, but their efficiency is not 100%, which is good if 50%. Those. somehow derive 400 kW of heat output when operating in constant mode.

                  In modern fiber laser 100 kW, the efficiency is already on the order of 40%, they are going to bring it to 50%, and 80% are theoretically achievable. Those. With the efficiency of 40%, we must dissipate the entire 150 kW of heat.
                  1. psiho117
                    psiho117 April 8 2019 20: 21
                    0
                    Quote: AVM
                    Those. With the efficiency of 40%, we must dissipate the entire 150 kW of heat.

                    just about, simultaneously. And then more, more, and more.
                    and this energy is not allocated to the blinds of the diesel engine, but to the lenses and electronic components.
                    Here's how to dispel it?
                    1. Shopping Mall
                      April 8 2019 21: 06
                      0
                      Quote: psiho117
                      Quote: AVM
                      Those. With the efficiency of 40%, we must dissipate the entire 150 kW of heat.

                      just about, simultaneously. And then more, more, and more.
                      and this energy is not allocated to the blinds of the diesel engine, but to the lenses and electronic components.
                      Here's how to dispel it?


                      Not really. What we are talking about, the efficiency of the 40% laser, is what the fiber laser units emit from which the required power is summed, they are distributed, and the cooling system is integrated into them.

                      And on the lenses, where the output radiation is reduced, with a multilayer coating, the thermal effect will depend on their transparency. For example, if they transmit 99,9% of the light at the wavelength of the laser in which they are placed, then for the 100 kW-h laser it will be 100 W.
  5. AsmyppoL
    AsmyppoL April 7 2019 20: 28
    +2
    Read with interest. Thanks to the author for the work done.
    It is a pity that he did not offer any of his model of using various types of aircraft ...
    And so this is a perception of the problem, unfortunately ...
    Absorption coefficient of laser radiation is only one of the parameters. If you use the author specified coeff. absorption of 0,95, then from the material it follows that it will be absorbed by the metal body of the entire 5% of the thermal energy of the laser beam. At the same time, there is absolutely no mention of the angle of reflection, which will further weaken the absorbed heat flux.
    And here it is already necessary to propose his own model of tactics for the use of aircraft with the danger of exposure to laser weapons. How does this relate to heat flow? This is the irradiation angle of the skin of the apparatus when moving along the path, its time in the irradiation zone, the number of vehicles needed to hit a ground target, the accuracy of the laser beam pointing, and so on.
    When the machine moves to the laser setup or at the angle angle 1 / 4, the angle of reflection will have a significant effect. In this case, the area of ​​the irradiation spot on the skin increases. Therefore, the most effective radiation from the side surface.
    In this case, the exposure time is reduced.
    The author probably does not know that the aircraft do not fly along the ideal line. They drift up and down. Here, the accuracy of pointing the beam and concentrating it on the point of the body parallel to the longitudinal axis of the device already plays - in this case the angle of reflection is minimal ...
    The author's conclusion about the inefficiency of the rotational motion of the aircraft without estimates is not convincing. For example, in X-ray laser tubes, tube rotation was a very effective way to cool tubes in vacuum. Assuming that the aircraft is irradiated with a laser beam having a sufficiently high power of 300 kW, then the skin will in the ideal case take 15 kW. What heat flow will be discharged into the environment during rotation? With a high thermal conductivity of the housing, the area of ​​heat removal will increase by several orders of magnitude. The presence of heat-resistant insulation under the metal case can provide the required temperature reduction during the necessary time the aircraft is in the affected area. The decision has long been known. For example, ATM mats or MBVP. There are also solid materials with low thermal conductivity ...
    As long as the laser will hit one or two targets, there is no guarantee that the third will not cover the laser installation itself .... And their costs are incommensurable ...
    We have not even considered the presence of sensors for exposure detection (heating) and measures on the body during (or even before irradiation) maneuvering the apparatus on the ground.
    1. AsmyppoL
      AsmyppoL April 8 2019 16: 14
      0
      Regarding the laser with a power 300 kW was not quite right ...
      We assessed the heating of 3 mm aluminum skin of an aircraft that does not rotate. 5% of the thermal power of the laser beam is absorbed. A spot on the skin in the course of flight affects the same point on the surface. To assess "from the flashlight", the following data were set: before the start of irradiation with a laser beam, the aircraft moved at an altitude of 2000 m with a Mach number of 0,8. The subsequent descent took place with an angle of attack of 30 degrees. Irradiation took place at a perspective angle of 3/4. For simplicity, a spot with dimensions of 100x100 mm was considered.
      It turns out that on the 4 second point, the temperature in the spot reaches 470 degrees and then the material softens and the plating part loses strength.
    2. psiho117
      psiho117 April 8 2019 19: 15
      0
      Quote: AsmyppoL
      What heat flow will be discharged into the environment during rotation?

      And you can also make the external false corpus rotate on the bearings. an air stream passes under it, and cools both the outer and the inner hull.
      Rotation is trite from the oncoming flow, polished luminous casing, on a heat-conducting substrate.
      A part will be reflected, a part will go to the evaporation of a rotating outer layer, another part will heat the constantly cooled substrate.
      and only then come the turn of the main body, which can also be protected for everyone.
      1. Shopping Mall
        April 8 2019 20: 01
        0
        Quote: psiho117
        Quote: AsmyppoL
        What heat flow will be discharged into the environment during rotation?

        And you can also make the external false corpus rotate on the bearings. an air stream passes under it, and cools both the outer and the inner hull.
        Rotation is trite from the oncoming flow, polished luminous casing, on a heat-conducting substrate.
        A part will be reflected, a part will go to the evaporation of a rotating outer layer, another part will heat the constantly cooled substrate.
        and only then come the turn of the main body, which can also be protected for everyone.


        Too much mechanics and fuss. It's easier all the same, probably, to put thermal insulation on top of a refractory material. On the other hand, perhaps something like this is also realized, maybe even without rotation, just a refractory material, and between it and the main body a gap in order to minimize heat transfer and double the cooling by the oncoming air flow.

        The only question is how to close the homing head - IR, TV, radar.
        1. psiho117
          psiho117 April 8 2019 20: 12
          0
          Quote: AVM
          the question is how to close the homing heads - IR, TV, radar.

          It seems to me that when blinding the GOS, the teams should go through the backup channel from the next missile / UAV guidance. Either they will go back a step - the rocket does not have a GOS, and control is done by holding the rocket in the alignment of a radio or laser beam directed from the platform that launched the launch / UAV guidance.
          In general, it seems to me that a second wind will follow for systems like "Chrysanthemum" and "Starstreak" - they are the most resistant to both the effects of electronic warfare and laser blinding
          1. Shopping Mall
            April 8 2019 20: 18
            0
            Quote: psiho117
            Quote: AVM
            the question is how to close the homing heads - IR, TV, radar.

            It seems to me that when blinding the GOS, the teams should go through the backup channel from the next missile / UAV guidance. Either they will go back a step - the rocket does not have a GOS, and control is done by holding the rocket in the alignment of a radio or laser beam directed from the platform that launched the launch / UAV guidance.
            In general, it seems to me that a second wind will follow for systems like "Chrysanthemum" and "Starstreak" - they are the most resistant to both the effects of electronic warfare and laser blinding


            Namely, i.e. telecontrol, i.e. essentially a step back. And this is immediately a rejection of the ARLGSN, the need for illumination throughout the flight (conventionally, to shine a rocket in the "backside"), and you can forget about the concept of "fire and forget".
            1. psiho117
              psiho117 April 8 2019 20: 53
              0
              Yeah, it’s either checkers or go bully
              Either shoot a swarm of expensive "smart" missiles from a safe distance, and inevitably lose a part, or keep a cheap missile all the time to ensure that the target is hit, but at the risk for the crew.
              Hmm, something this reminds me ... I even know which country uses the first method, and which - the second, so cheap and cheerful ....
    3. Shopping Mall
      April 8 2019 20: 03
      +1
      Quote: AsmyppoL
      Read with interest. Thanks to the author for the work done.
      It is a pity that he did not offer any of his model of using various types of aircraft ...
      And so this is a perception of the problem, unfortunately ...
      Absorption coefficient of laser radiation is only one of the parameters. If you use the author specified coeff. absorption of 0,95, then from the material it follows that it will be absorbed by the metal body of the entire 5% of the thermal energy of the laser beam. At the same time, there is absolutely no mention of the angle of reflection, which will further weaken the absorbed heat flux.
      And here it is already necessary to propose his own model of tactics for the use of aircraft with the danger of exposure to laser weapons. How does this relate to heat flow? This is the irradiation angle of the skin of the apparatus when moving along the path, its time in the irradiation zone, the number of vehicles needed to hit a ground target, the accuracy of the laser beam pointing, and so on.
      When the machine moves to the laser setup or at the angle angle 1 / 4, the angle of reflection will have a significant effect. In this case, the area of ​​the irradiation spot on the skin increases. Therefore, the most effective radiation from the side surface.
      In this case, the exposure time is reduced.
      The author probably does not know that the aircraft do not fly along the ideal line. They drift up and down. Here, the accuracy of pointing the beam and concentrating it on the point of the body parallel to the longitudinal axis of the device already plays - in this case the angle of reflection is minimal ...
      The author's conclusion about the inefficiency of the rotational motion of the aircraft without estimates is not convincing. For example, in X-ray laser tubes, tube rotation was a very effective way to cool tubes in vacuum. Assuming that the aircraft is irradiated with a laser beam having a sufficiently high power of 300 kW, then the skin will in the ideal case take 15 kW. What heat flow will be discharged into the environment during rotation? With a high thermal conductivity of the housing, the area of ​​heat removal will increase by several orders of magnitude. The presence of heat-resistant insulation under the metal case can provide the required temperature reduction during the necessary time the aircraft is in the affected area. The decision has long been known. For example, ATM mats or MBVP. There are also solid materials with low thermal conductivity ...
      As long as the laser will hit one or two targets, there is no guarantee that the third will not cover the laser installation itself .... And their costs are incommensurable ...
      We have not even considered the presence of sensors for exposure detection (heating) and measures on the body during (or even before irradiation) maneuvering the apparatus on the ground.


      Yes, you are right, without calculations, everything is rather abstract. But the calculations will take many volumes, especially considering how many options are available for wavelengths, curvature of the surface, angles of incidence, surface albedo, etc. etc. I can’t do it for sure hi
      1. AsmyppoL
        AsmyppoL April 17 2019 18: 39
        0
        In principle, we spent a lot of interesting calculations that confirm declarative slogans and quotations in articles of the adversary ... I tried to post materials on the site - it did not work ...

        Laser installations and mortar mines. It turns out that mortar mines are terrorists' weapons. Laser systems hit mines quickly enough and within the stated figures. After the "debriefing" on laser radiation offhand, they came up with two options that make it possible to practically reduce the actions of laser installations to a minimum, but why should terrorists improve their lives?)) With shells and hail, the laser has practically no chance ... The most important thing is that such installations are perfect in our country not scary)))
  6. ares1988
    ares1988 April 7 2019 20: 32
    0
    The venturers from BAE Systems also offer this option:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rhWBAFAGwzE
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 April 8 2019 19: 20
      0
      Quote: ares1988
      Entrepreneurs from BAE Systems

      Now, these guys understand that after a series of pulses, the ground-based laser is stupidly overheated.
      And the idea of ​​forced ionization of the atmosphere itself is interesting .... Though very limited in use.
      1. Shopping Mall
        April 8 2019 19: 57
        0
        Quote: psiho117
        Quote: ares1988
        Entrepreneurs from BAE Systems

        And the idea of ​​forced ionization of the atmosphere itself is interesting .... Though very limited in use.


        There is such an effect - defocusing of the laser in a plasma formation, but if I understood correctly, when the laser itself makes the plasma, then the process goes on self-defocusing, self-focusing, i.e. the beam does not diffuse.



        I thought about making an artificial lens on the path of the "enemy" laser "with my own" laser, but did not dare to write about it, because there are too many assumptions, it turns out that this is not so unrealistic.
        1. psiho117
          psiho117 April 8 2019 20: 18
          0
          Quote: AVM
          I thought about making an artificial lens on the path of the "enemy" laser "with my own" laser, but did not dare to write about it, because there are too many assumptions, it turns out that this is not so unrealistic.

          it can and is real - but not applicable.
          For it is only possible from an apparatus that follows somewhere in the stratosphere, then it can underneath it, in denser layers, to produce this very forced ionization.
          Well, in principle, a good option for a stratospheric hypersonic bomb - it’s only a pity that these bombers are out of date in the last century.
          1. Shopping Mall
            April 9 2019 08: 46
            0
            Quote: psiho117
            ... Well, in principle, a good option for a stratospheric hypersonic bomber - it is a pity that these bombers are outdated in the last century.


            Which ones?
            1. psiho117
              psiho117 April 9 2019 14: 54
              0
              I mean the very idea of ​​high-altitude bombers.
  7. Aviator_
    Aviator_ April 7 2019 21: 45
    0
    It is, of course, informative, but there are minor flaws - for some reason the author calls a plastic called nylon (so it will be in Russian) in English "nylon".
  8. Operator
    Operator April 8 2019 00: 12
    -1
    Protection from laser radiation is simple as a nail:
    in the atmosphere - a zigzag flight path;
    in space - ablation.
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 8 2019 19: 53
      0
      Quote: Operator
      Protection from laser radiation is simple as a nail:
      in the atmosphere - a zigzag flight path;
      in space - ablation.


      About space is a separate conversation, maybe I'll come back to it.

      A zigzag trajectory is very energy-intensive. For example, in a rocket in-in or in-s, it will devour the whole energy, i.e. this is a reduction in range 2-3 times.

      The planning bomb is also not particularly maneuvering, as are the unguided mines and MLRS shells.
      1. Operator
        Operator April 8 2019 21: 11
        -1
        The zigzag trajectory is optimal for dropping speeds below 5M ballistic missiles in order to stop plasma formation and enter into operation of a radar or optical seeker.

        Protection for planning bombs and unguided artillery / rockets and mines is a leading laser-guided missile / missile.
        1. Shopping Mall
          April 8 2019 22: 42
          0
          Quote: Operator
          The zigzag trajectory is optimal for dropping speeds below 5M ballistic missiles in order to stop plasma formation and enter into operation of a radar or optical seeker.


          The question is how to hide the GOS. The very blocks of ballistic missiles are already stable.

          Quote: Operator
          Protection for planning bombs and unguided artillery / rockets and mines is a leading laser-guided missile / missile.


          So far there are no such people and it is not clear what they should represent.
          1. Operator
            Operator April 8 2019 22: 58
            -1
            GOS is protected by a zigzag path, a nose cone of opaque (RGSN) or transparent ceramics (for example, AlON) and a protective filter (in the case of an optical GOS).

            GOS anti-laser ammunition (flying anti-zigzag) - an optical sensor with a protective filter located behind a transparent ceramic fairing.
            1. Shopping Mall
              April 9 2019 08: 37
              0
              Quote: Operator
              GOS is protected by a zigzag path, a nose cone of opaque (RGSN) or transparent ceramics (for example, AlON) and a protective filter (in the case of an optical GOS).

              GOS anti-laser ammunition (flying anti-zigzag) - an optical sensor with a protective filter located behind a transparent ceramic fairing.


              A zig-zag trajectory will not help. the target must be in the homing head grip zone, i.e. she must look at the target. Otherwise, she will have to catch the target again every time after the "zigzag".

              ALON from the bullets, although it is transparent, it is not known how it will behave with powerful laser radiation, perhaps it will instantly fade.

              If there is a high temperature radio transparent pottery, this can help for radar homing.

              But in optics, infrared and laser sensor nothing will come of nothing. Either the sensor does not see anything, or the laser will burn the optics. It is possible to make the filter not allowing a certain wavelength, but lasers from different manufacturers will have different wavelengths, sometimes with a slight offset, at what wavelength to close the view?

              And the resistance of such filters to powerful radiation also raises questions.

              What will transparent ceramics give to protect an optical sensor if it is transparent?
              1. Operator
                Operator April 9 2019 18: 31
                -1
                I agree to the RGSN.
  9. AlexTss
    AlexTss April 8 2019 00: 20
    +1
    Dear Andrew.
    Let me disagree with you about the ablative protection of "Buran".
    The only place where (on the "Buran") it was used were panels of ablative thermal protection for the inter-element gap.
    This was mentioned on the site buran.ru where did you get the ship’s photos and the thermal load diagram.
    The elements of the nose fairing and nose of the wing are made of carbon-carbon composites.
    The fact is that, although "Buran" is an orbital, it is still an aircraft. And for flight in the atmosphere, in the final section, it needs a very precise shape of these elements. Ablative protection does not provide this.
    In the process of defending the diploma, at one time, I had to really "taste" this topic.
    Now, fortunately, all this is not even chipboard smile
    On the same resource buran.ru, everything is very intelligently written and with photos even smile

    Ablation protection was on BOR-ah yes hi

    PS
    And in the photo "Ablative protection of the spacecraft" Buran "in the section" - this is just a reusable tile wink
    Cool thing smile , looks like foam, only finer-grained, weighs almost nothing, and when the centimeter thickness of the sample is heated with an oxygen burner, on the back side, the temperature change by hand was almost not felt good
    Regards, Alexey hi
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 8 2019 10: 31
      0
      Quote: AlexTss
      Dear Andrew.
      Let me disagree with you about the ablative protection of "Buran".
      The only place where (on "Buran") it was used were panels of ablative heat protection for the inter-element gap ...


      You are right, I was confused by the phrase in one source: "On the nose cone and wing tips of the vehicle, where temperatures exceed 1260 ° C, a material made of carbon reinforced with carbon fiber is used. During the return of the vehicle to Earth, this material is destroyed, and it is necessary replace with a new one before each subsequent flight. "
      1. psiho117
        psiho117 April 8 2019 19: 30
        0
        Author, why did you not mention, so to speak, classical methods of countering anti-aircraft guns, just applied against lasers?
        Well, for example, the banal installation suppression - spec. anti-laser rocket (in the image of anti-radar), or shelling of barrel artillery (and the laser is a priori subject to its influence, because it is the front edge weapon, whose firing range is inferior even to a seedy MANPADS) and other similar measures?
        I'm not talking about using the weather conditions - to podgadat attack so that the lasers were minimally effective - a big mind is not necessary.
        1. Shopping Mall
          April 8 2019 19: 50
          0
          Quote: psiho117
          Author, why did you not mention, so to speak, classical methods of countering anti-aircraft guns, just applied against lasers?
          Well, for example, the banal installation suppression - spec. anti-laser rocket (in the image of anti-radar), or shelling of barrel artillery (and the laser is a priori subject to its influence, because it is the front edge weapon, whose firing range is inferior even to a seedy MANPADS) and other similar measures?
          I'm not talking about using the weather conditions - to podgadat attack so that the lasers were minimally effective - a big mind is not necessary.


          So far there are no "anti-laser" missiles, and accordingly there is nothing to talk about. Theoretically, the laser beam is inhomogeneous, so there is guidance in the laser beam as in the ATGM "Kornet" or "Reflex". But there is a low-power beam. To create sensors that, on the one hand, will distinguish where the beam is, conventionally, the middle and where the edge, and at the same time withstand 30-100 kW of radiation, is another task.

          Barrel artillery shells are also likely to be exposed to laser air defense, with power from 100 kW. Of course, no one canceled the fire attack. But again, the laser is not a unique product, which will replace everything, no - it is an additional means of defense.
          Projectiles with guidance on the reflected laser radiation, such as "Krasnopol", violence over the homing head even 5-15 kW will not withstand, let alone 100 kW and above.

          Podgadat weather is nice, but it is an unstable factor. And what if the logic of the attack requires action, and there is no rain? We will wait, how much? Or they began to advance to the position of attack, the attack itself, and the fog picked up and dissipated. And shelling from a distance of 40-100 km you need to know that there is a bad weather over the position of the laser to 5 km.

          And how bad weather reduces the efficiency of a powerful laser? On 50%? 30%? I have no exact data.
          1. psiho117
            psiho117 April 8 2019 20: 39
            0
            Quote: AVM
            And how bad weather reduces the efficiency of a powerful laser? On 50%? 30%? I have no exact data.

            up to 100% (rain, snow, dust storm).
            in the fog, normal rain - at least 60%
            The banal high humidity, already causes an increase in divergence of manholes. 30% ray.
            And to shoot from a laser over the sea is generally a perversion, at a height of 300m there are so much water vapor and salt crystals in the atmosphere that it does not make sense to shoot at all - huge energy losses and the divergence of the beam already on a few hundred meters.
            And yet, there remains an important factor in the formation of a plasma channel - it can easily damage or destroy the radiating unit. And still, on the ionized channel the lightning can rot.
            Barrel artillery shells are also likely to be exposed to laser air defense, with power from 100 kW.

            for cast iron 155mm projectiles you need a fairly powerful (or long) impact. Americans in reports indicated that they need a 200-300 kW laser.
            And it immediately pulls problems of size, power consumption, cooling, prices finally ... But the shells do not fly one by one!
            1. Shopping Mall
              April 9 2019 08: 45
              0
              Quote: psiho117
              Quote: AVM
              And how bad weather reduces the efficiency of a powerful laser? On 50%? 30%? I have no exact data.

              up to 100% (rain, snow, dust storm).


              Well, in a good dust storm and the KR or the plane may crash because of the clogged engine.

              Quote: psiho117
              in the fog, normal rain - at least 60%
              The banal high humidity, already causes an increase in divergence of manholes. 30% ray.


              For different wavelengths in different ways, it is hardly possible to reduce everything to a single digit.

              Quote: psiho117
              And to shoot from a laser over the sea is generally a perversion, at a height of 300m there are so much water vapor and salt crystals in the atmosphere that it does not make sense to shoot at all - huge energy losses and the divergence of the beam already on a few hundred meters.


              However, the Americans are going to do it, and the Germans, and Britain.

              Quote: psiho117
              And yet, there remains an important factor in the formation of a plasma channel - it can easily damage or destroy the radiating unit. And still, on the ionized channel the lightning can rot.


              Maybe theoretically. As far as I know, they tried to make laser lightning rods, but so far in the laboratory it is possible to get a plasma channel not more than a few tens of meters. It turns out intermittent.

              If it were possible to create a continuous channel, it would be a weapon. High-voltage discharge directly to the body of the enemy's aircraft, or high-frequency, such as local electromagnetic radiation.

              Quote: psiho117
              Barrel artillery shells are also likely to be exposed to laser air defense, with power from 100 kW.

              for cast iron 155mm projectiles you need a fairly powerful (or long) impact. Americans in reports indicated that they need a 200-300 kW laser.
              And it immediately pulls problems of size, power consumption, cooling, prices finally ... But the shells do not fly one by one!


              All so, for artillery 100 kW possible and not enough. And about one by one they don’t fly - a glut of air defense is quite possible in any situation.

              The unguided projectile is less dangerous, and some of the guided ones have already become more expensive than the CD. Recall the American guided missile 155 mm for Zamvolta.
  10. Operator
    Operator April 8 2019 21: 17
    -1
    Quote: AVM
    self-defocusing is self-focusing, i.e. the beam does not scatter

    After several self-focusing / defocusing, the laser beam loses its energy by orders of magnitude (spent on heating air molecules) —the natural limitation of the power of an atmospheric laser is based on this.
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 9 2019 08: 39
      0
      Quote: Operator
      Quote: AVM
      self-defocusing is self-focusing, i.e. the beam does not scatter

      After several self-focusing / defocusing, the laser beam loses its energy by orders of magnitude (spent on heating air molecules) —the natural limitation of the power of an atmospheric laser is based on this.


      Unfortunately, I do not have data on power loss by various lasers, depending on their output power, wavelength, air density, precipitation, etc.
  11. Vadim237
    Vadim237 April 9 2019 00: 12
    0
    Tantalum carbide-based material - in my opinion the best material for protection against laser and high temperature, heavy, but still
  12. M. Michelson
    M. Michelson April 9 2019 06: 31
    0
    Nda ... The problem, the crossword puzzle, the rugby bus (© Raikin), wherever you look.
    Thanks for the review.
  13. rica1952
    rica1952 April 9 2019 13: 00
    0
    No need to reinvent the wheel. This problem has already been solved on the 1 steps ,, Topol-M ,,
    1. Shopping Mall
      April 9 2019 13: 37
      0
      Quote: rica1952
      No need to reinvent the wheel. This problem has already been solved on the 1 steps ,, Topol-M ,,


      How?
  14. aiden
    aiden 19 June 2019 02: 01
    0
    In my opinion, such lasers have more disadvantages than advantages. For one that can shoot down missiles or aircraft, you will need to carry some kind of nuclear reactor with you. Plus, he will not be able to constantly emit a beam, since the source will overheat, it will still have to be dragged liquid nitrogen for cooling. The false target (or volley) at which the laser will fire will give time for a second strike both on the object of protection and on its reactor, which will cause even more problems. Moreover, in the atmosphere it will be distorted from various conditions - dust, rain, rarefaction of air, etc. And in space, the problem of cooling may be solved, but it remains with the energy source. Again, a nuclear reactor will have to be sent into orbit. In any case, it will be useless in space if the Spiral program is revived. The only thing many people suggest is to use on ships. Yes, and then doubts about how he will save from torpedoes, ship’s guns, and indeed, from volley fire.
  15. Struv rim
    Struv rim 12 February 2020 20: 22
    0
    Kinetic interceptors do not work in the atmosphere.

    The Russian Federation is moving to hypersonic platforms that operate in the atmosphere.

    A mass rise into orbit of a missile defense of a different type will cause withdrawal from the START treaties and a massive rise into orbit of waiting cobalt nuclear warheads that detonate when you try to bring them down

    Nuclear weapons are ALWAYS stronger than armor, it is limited only by common sense, necessary and sufficient. The more protection, the more dangerous nuclear weapons will be.