The advent of battle lasers. 4 August 2019 year

225
Really important news often go unnoticed. They occur, no one notices them, but the events mentioned in this news often have consequences that later, having developed to a large scale, make observers gasp - and it’s good, if only out of surprise.

The advent of battle lasers. 4 August 2019 year

Chinese-made UAV - the first victim of combat lasers in this war




On 4 of August 2019 of the year one of these events occurred, mentioned in such news, but not noticed by anyone.

For the first time, a combat vehicle armed with a combat laser destroyed another combat vehicle on the battlefield. In a real war, on a real battlefield.

And no one noticed.

Unexpected leader


Turkey is not accepted in the ranks of the countries-innovators in military affairs. But it seems that they will be able to surprise the population of the planet in this century. The Turks took a powerful start as an industrial force, and any participant in military tenders in the Islamic world knows what strength they have already gained. The fact that it is the Turks who build skyscrapers in Russia is also no secret.

Recently, there have been rumors about Turkish plans to build a springboard aircraft carrier, similar in “ideology” to Vikramaditye or Kuznetsov. The Turks participated in the F-35 program precisely as a manufacturer of components and plan to create their own combat aircraft. But that's all for now.

But with combat lasers it turned out differently.

Turkey, preoccupied with achieving military superiority in the region, as well as gaining qualitative advantages in military power over Greece and Russia (and, apparently, also over Israel), has long and seriously invested in innovative systems weapons, including weapons based on new technical principles. As early as the beginning of the 2010's, the Turkish company SAVTAG demonstrated experimental samples of plants of different capacities, starting from 1,25 kW, and then to 50 kW. The systems were created in conjunction with TUBITAK, a state research institute. The Turks showed these systems as technology demonstrators, and did not particularly hide the fact that they plan to use these developments as weapons.

However, they managed to put all the observers on the wrong track - reports from both the Turkish Ministry of Defense press releases and the specialized press hinted that Turkish laser weapons would be primarily produced for the Navy, and in general, repeats the American work. Nobody was particularly interested then. Well, the Turks ... Well, they want lasers ... So what?

In 2015, TUBITAK announced that experimental lasers successfully hit targets. Then it became known that the program was funded - it turned out that the Turks were pouring a lot of money into laser weapons - only in 2015, 450 million US dollars were spent on the program. For a country that has access to all Western technologies and already saves a lot of money on R&D, this was a very impressive amount. And, one must understand that other years did not differ much from 2015. Nevertheless, experts of most countries of the world Turkish progress, as they say, slammed.

In the same year, it became known that the Aselsan holding, the largest Turkish military-industrial corporation, took the Turkish laser weapons program “under the wing”.

On 7 on July 2018, the company issued a press release stating that it had successfully tested a combat laser capable of hitting small-sized UAVs from 500 meters, as well as destroying explosive devices from 200 meters. The compact laser gun was installed on the Turkish Otokar Cobra armored car, and, most importantly, was equipped with a guidance system that allows you to continuously hold the laser marker on target.

Laser power cannot be compared with any kinetic ammunition. It is insignificant. A projectile from an 76-mm cannon gives the target such energy that the laser can tell the target only by heating a single point for a very long time and continuously. And this is exactly what the specialists in optoelectronic systems from Aselsan achieved. Their gun could “cling” to a specific point on the target and “warm” it until it was completely destroyed. Even if the target was moving.

And that all changed.


"Cobra" armed with a laser gun mount from Aselsan


In a press release, Aselsan emphasized that she was able to achieve reliable target tracking, continuous laser operation and an extremely low shooting cost. The latter is obvious. Where a conventional cannon spends a projectile that doesn’t have to hit the target at all, a low-power laser gun requires only diesel fuel for the generator.

The company showed a photo of a machine armed with a laser, and a video presentation showing the results of firing at metal plates.



Sensation, however, did not happen, and the news in the world was met quite calmly. No less calmly, the Turks continued to work on laser weapons. They knew that the most interesting press releases about their products were yet to come.

Erdogan Libyan War


The ongoing war in Libya did not go as Recep Tayyip Erdogan would have liked: the Islamists on whom he put lose. This problem did not arise yesterday, and the Turks have been opposing the Libyan National Army of Khalifa Haftar for quite some time. The latter has the support of a wide variety of countries and forces - from Saudi Arabia and the USA to Russia and France. Russian mercenaries and pilot mercenaries Eric Prince, the founder of Blackwater, are working at Haftar. MiG-23, specially repaired for his Air Force, are being brought from Haftar to Russia, and from the UAE are the “Shell” air defense system for protection against air strikes. And Haftar is slowly but surely winning.

And Erdogan again, as elsewhere, set the wrong horse. As in Syria, as in Egypt, in Libya, those forces that Turkey regarded as friendly and relied on failed. True, in Libya, the Turks are still counting on something. Turkey continues to support the so-called “government” and its friendly Misurat groups. Turkey supplied and is delivering heavy weapons to these groups, sending advisers and instructors. Seeing that this was not enough, the Turks began to transfer to Libya the militants previously employed in the Idlib province in Syria. We will not delve into the course of this distant war from us, something else is important to us.

The synthesis of the need for Turkey to stop Haftar, on the one hand, and advanced high-tech weapons, which have no world analogues without discounts, on the other, should have happened sooner or later. And he happened.

4 August 2019 year


For operators of the UAE-owned UAV Wing Loong II, a Chinese-made aircraft, this was an ordinary reconnaissance and combat mission. Their drone armed with an anti-tank missile barraged over the Misurata area, conducting reconnaissance in the interests of Haftar’s troops and looking for targets that could be destroyed by a direct attack. The war in Libya has long taken the form of a bizarre mixture of the actions of irregular formations and weapons, created on the basis of the most advanced technologies, and UAVs were one of the symbols of such a mixture. The departure, however, ended with the UAV being shot down.

And soon the world flew around the photo.










Downed UAV from different angles



The burn that destroyed the UAV


The details immediately became known. The Turkish installation, which shot down the UAV, is mounted on the chassis of an off-road armored car. Like the earlier Aselsan model, it is equipped with a Turkish-made optoelectronic guidance system. The system allows you to accurately inspect the target for firing, to select a vulnerable point, and then hold the laser marker on this point until the target is completely destroyed. Also, as with the previously demonstrated laser gun, a continuous radiation mode is provided, without long interruptions to the "pumping" of the laser. Gun power - 50 kW. This is so far the most powerful combat laser in the Turkish ground combat vehicle.


"Laser combat vehicle", so to speak. The same applies now in Libya


The important point is that this is not an experimental setup. This is a fully functional combat vehicle armed with a laser gun. And she has just been tested in battle, and not at all against the "commercial" drone from ebay. Such a gun could well bring down an unarmored helicopter, and easily. And Turkey can easily build such weapons in large quantities - already now. Moreover, this is a tactical weapon, it does not need any special conditions for transportation, a combat vehicle armed with a laser has the same level of mobility as any other armored car of the same type. These weapons may well be used by ordinary soldiers, including conscripts. And the cost of a shot with this gun is literally equal to the price of diesel fuel spent during the shooting. Let's just say that an unarmored helicopter will cost twenty-five rubles, approximately.

Will this episode be the start of a "laser weapon race"? Let's make a prediction: no, it won't. The epoch-making news, as they say, did not thunder. Well, who are the Turks in the world of war industry, right?

The Turks will continue to improve their weapons, and no one will pay attention to them. And so it will be until, in some other war, Turkish laser cannons on armored personnel carriers and tanks they will not massively burn out optical-electronic sights of enemy equipment, burn engines to unarmored vehicles, shoot down helicopters and UAVs, disable aircraft standing on the ground from a long distance, mow down infantry without noise and external unmasking signs. And then everyone will shudder ...

Entertaining in all this stories is how essentially beginners in the laser topic occupy that niche in which the "grandees" of laser business, such as Russia and the USA, do not even think to climb. They occupy successfully and very quickly, building already practically serial military equipment faster than their competitors in the world read news about it - literally. This is all the more surprising because both Russia and the United States are superior to the Turks in laser technology and, in theory, should “attack with the threat of loss of advantage” - work ahead of the curve. There is something touched, and incomparable with Turkish, and there is some experience, we still have from Afghanistan. And a much more complex set for much more complex tasks, “Relight”, is already in operation in Russia. And the United States has a “working” ship installation. In a single, however, instance.

But ground-based combat vehicles with tactical-level lasers are not being built and used in Russia or the United States. This is done by the Turks, and the transition of the quantity of their work to the quality of technology as a whole to a new level is a matter of the very near future. They will grow the faster the greater their combat experience. As well as not far off “acquaintance” of the enemies of Turkey with what a combat laser is in its own skin - in the truest sense of this expression. In the future laser arms race, the Turks have already claimed a prize for themselves, and it is not a fact that this place will not be the first in the end.
  • Alexander Timokhin
  • Aselsan, TUBITAK, Alpay Osmanoglu, The Tripolitanian (twitter), The Libya Observer
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

225 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    6 August 2019 04: 42
    In the future laser arms race, the Turks have already claimed a prize for themselves, and it is not a fact that this place will not be the first in the end.
    It is not a problem to create a sufficiently powerful and efficient laser, a problem is to create a battery for it. How to create a compact and powerful generator, so you can talk about the prospects of the laser.
    1. +1
      6 August 2019 07: 27
      Quote: Flamberg
      It is not a problem to create a sufficiently powerful and efficient laser, a problem is to create a battery for it.

      The huge problem is to create a powerful and efficient laser.

      Quote: shinobi
      I will say more, compact lasers up to 1 megawatt (the size of a home refrigerator) are far from news and are widely used in the aerospace industry for precise "cutting" of metal products.

      Can you tell us more about "compact lasers up to 1 megawatt (the size of a home refrigerator)"? The bourgeois hardly reached a power of 150 kilowatts, despite the fact that their laser weighed 750 kg !!!

      Their goal is to make a laser where for every kilowatt 5 kg of weight will fall. Total 5 tons (Karl) per megawatt. Materiel however. fellow
      https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/08/us-targets-a-megawatt-laser-by-2023-and-then-deployment-in-drones-and-satellites-for-hypersonic-and-icbm-defense.html

      PS
      And here they write that the 1000 kilowatt laser will be created only between the 2025 and 2026 years ...
      https://www.militaryaerospace.com/sensors/article/16722085/military-eyes-prototype-megawattclass-laser-weapon-for-ballistic-missile-defense-in-next-seven-years
      1. +3
        6 August 2019 08: 12
        The bourgeois with difficulty reached a power of 150 kilowatts despite the fact that their laser weighed 750 kg !!!
        Was it a pure laser or the whole installation? With a generator, drive, SLA?
        1. +2
          6 August 2019 08: 23
          Everything about everything 750 kg with the size of the refrigerator and power in 150 kilowatts in the ground version.
          The High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS) will weigh just 750 kilograms and fit into a space about the size of a large refrigerator.
          1. +2
            6 August 2019 08: 40
            That's the question, how much of the 750 kg is the battery, and how much is the laser itself.
            1. -4
              6 August 2019 09: 09
              Quote: Flamberg
              That's the question, how much of the 750 kg is the battery, and how much is the laser itself.

              It does not matter since these things are not separate and make up a single system. He puts this system on a truck, launches it on board an airplane or into space.
              1. +7
                6 August 2019 09: 16
                What does it mean does not matter? There can be a 50kg laser, 100kg SLA, it goes to a 600kg power source. I kind of wrote in Russian that the laser problem in the power source or what?
                1. -3
                  6 August 2019 09: 36
                  Quote: Flamberg
                  What does it mean does not matter? There can be a 50kg laser, 100kg SLA, it goes to a 600kg power source. I kind of wrote in Russian that the laser problem in the power source or what?

                  Irrelevant. What is the specific gravity of the battery in your cell phone? Does that make any sense? After all, you carry the entire mobile phone in your pocket, and not in parts. Moreover, in advanced devices, the battery is not removed at all.

                  The same situation with the laser. For the user, the size of the diode itself does not matter. It is a few centimeters. Weight and dimensions are important whole system. It is her weight that they are trying to cram in 4-5 kg for every kilowatt of output energy.

                  You wrote the wrong things in Russian. The power supply is not a problem for the laser. In your opinion, the nuclear power plant does not have enough energy to power the laser counter-air defense of this station? If there is a lot of energy, why is there no laser there with an output to the terawatt that will guarantee to bring down everything and everyone? Why in California they conduct experiments using simultaneously 192 (one hundred ninety-two) lasers if one can create the same power?
                  1. +4
                    6 August 2019 09: 49
                    The same situation with the laser. For the user, the size of the diode itself does not matter. It is a few centimeters. The overall dimensions of the entire system are important. It is her weight that they are trying to cram at 4-5 kg ​​per kilowatt of output energy.

                    Comrade, you're really in an armored train ...
                    I repeat to you again whole system problem This power supply is powerful and compact.
                    The power supply is not a problem for the laser.
                    Gloom ... An energy source for energy weapons is not a problem ... Well, think of a chamera a trailer from a truck with a power source to attach ... what problems can there be ... fool
                    1. 0
                      6 August 2019 09: 54
                      Quote: Flamberg
                      Comrade, you're really in an armored train ...
                      I repeat the problem to you once again all systems are a powerful and compact power source.

                      1. Get excited.
                      2. The power supply is not a problem for the laser. In your opinion, the nuclear power plant does not have enough energy to power the laser counter-air defense of this station? If there is a lot of energy, why is there no laser there with an output to the terawatt that will guarantee to bring down everything and everyone? Why in California they conduct experiments using simultaneously 192 (one hundred ninety-two) lasers if one can create the same power?

                      Quote: Flamberg
                      Gloom ... An energy source for energy weapons is not a problem ... Well, think of a chamera a trailer from a truck with a power source to attach ... what problems can there be ...

                      It is not a problem. Before you twist your finger at your temple, divide the output power by the laser efficiency and you will be surprised at how much energy is needed even for a megawatt laser. So why is there no megawatt laser today if the energy to power it is sea?
                      1. +2
                        6 August 2019 10: 02
                        The power supply is not a problem for the laser. In your opinion, the nuclear power plant does not have enough energy to power the laser counter-air defense of this station? If there is a lot of energy, why is there no laser there with an output to the terawatt that will guarantee to bring down everything and everything? Why in California they conduct experiments using simultaneously 192 (one hundred ninety-two) lasers if one can create the same power?
                        I don’t know. Enlighten.
                        It is not a problem. Before you twist your finger at your temple, divide the output power by the laser efficiency and you will be surprised at how much energy is needed even for a megawatt laser.

                        Don't be smart. Is one megawatt not much? Many and without a good power source or a "shot" once an hour or a trailer from a truck.
                        So why is there no megawatt laser today if the energy to power it is sea?
                        Probably the secrets of Tesla were not revealed and we are not able to transfer energy from nuclear power plants without wires.
                      2. +1
                        6 August 2019 10: 12
                        Quote: Flamberg
                        I don’t know. Enlighten.

                        Patamushta restriction in laser technology today is not a power source. They have a power supply for 192's lasers at the same time, but there is no one laser with equivalent power. fellow
                        https://www.forbes.com/sites/braze/2019/07/25/mobile-transformation-hinges-on-flexible-technology-ecosystem/#3e8e499211a9

                        Quote: Flamberg
                        Don't be smart. Is one megawatt not much? Many and without a good power source or a "shot" once an hour or a trailer from a truck.

                        No, not much. If you want to shoot short pulses (a megawatt laser should "burn" only from 2 to 60 seconds), then you don't need a megawatt power source at all. You can accumulate energy for a long time and tediously. We are talking about long impulses with a power of megawatts. With an efficiency of 48%, 2 megawatts of energy is enough for you.

                        Quote: Flamberg
                        Probably the secrets of Tesla were not revealed and we are not able to transfer energy from nuclear power plants without wires.

                        Who does religion forbid to stretch wires from a nuclear power plant to a laser protecting this same nuclear power plant?

                        PS
                        As I understand it, I post links for myself. request
                      3. -4
                        6 August 2019 10: 19
                        Patamushta restriction in laser technology today is not a power source. They have a power supply for 192 lasers at the same time, but there is no one laser with equivalent power. fellow
                        https://www.forbes.com/sites/braze/2019/07/25/mobile-transformation-hinges-on-flexible-technology-ecosystem/#3e8e499211a9
                        This is not an answer. The link generally opens some heresy.
                        No, not much. If you want to shoot short pulses (a megawatt laser should "burn" only from 2 to 60 seconds), then you don't need a megawatt power source at all. You can accumulate energy for a long time and tediously. We are talking about long impulses with a power of megawatts. With an efficiency of 48%, 2 megawatts of energy is enough for you.
                        Well, yes, for 60 seconds, enabling 2000 dummies is not a problem.
                        Who does religion forbid to stretch wires from a nuclear power plant to a laser protecting this same nuclear power plant?
                        To nobody. Like no one forbids to enclose nuclear power plants with an anti-tank ditch and minefields.
                      4. +3
                        6 August 2019 11: 50
                        Quote: Flamberg
                        This is not an answer. The link generally opens some heresy.

                        Well I do not know. It opens normally for me. Once again I answer at your request. Today, restrictions on the laser output are not limitations on the power source, but on the laser itself. You can’t pump the laser ad infinitum ...

                        Quote: Flamberg
                        Well, yes, for 60 seconds, enabling 2000 dummies is not a problem.

                        No problem. The phase 3 amperes each from the electric company 40 approaches my home. I and my neighbors can power a laser that will be developed in 6-7 years. Moreover, the laser efficiency will improve and, accordingly, the power consumption will fall.

                        Quote: Flamberg
                        To nobody. Like no one forbids to enclose nuclear power plants with an anti-tank ditch and minefields.

                        You’ll laugh, but the nuclear plants are protected from a foot attack so that minefields and anti-tank ditches are not needed. But from the air, nuclear power plants are protected by the old, not unreliable method. The aerodynamic goals are still somewhat knocked down, but with ballistic goals the most that there is a problem. A megawatt laser would be quite out of place. And even better, a dozen of these lasers.
                      5. -1
                        6 August 2019 12: 00
                        Well I do not know. It opens normally for me. Once again I answer at your request. Today, restrictions on the laser output are not limitations on the power source, but on the laser itself. You can’t pump the laser ad infinitum ...
                        It also opens normally for me, only in terms of content it has nothing to do with lasers. I'm not saying that the laser should be infinitely powerful.
                        No problem. The phase 3 amperes each from the electric company 40 approaches my home. I and my neighbors can power a laser that will be developed in 6-7 years. Moreover, the laser efficiency will improve and, accordingly, the power consumption will fall.
                        220 * 40 * 3 = 26400W, even if 380 then 45,6 kW, is not some kind of cosmic achievement.
                        You’ll laugh, but the nuclear plants are protected from a foot attack so that minefields and anti-tank ditches are not needed. But from the air, nuclear power plants are protected by the old, not unreliable method. The aerodynamic goals are still somewhat knocked down, but with ballistic goals the most that there is a problem. A megawatt laser would be quite out of place. And even better, a dozen of these lasers.
                        And they don’t put it because there are no such lasers?
                      6. 0
                        6 August 2019 12: 51
                        Quote: Flamberg
                        It also opens normally for me, only in terms of content it has nothing to do with lasers. I'm not saying that the laser should be infinitely powerful.


                        World's Largest Laser Could Solve Our Energy Problems

                        Quote: Flamberg
                        220 * 40 * 3 = 26400W, even if 380 then 45,6 kW, is not some kind of cosmic achievement.

                        Exactly. Total 25 20 of my neighbors will be pulled by a megawatt laser.

                        Quote: Flamberg
                        And they don’t put it because there are no such lasers?

                        Well, finally it dawned on you.
                        There will be such lasers years through 7.

                        PS
                        We have three phases for 400 volts.
                      7. -2
                        6 August 2019 12: 53
                        Exactly. Only 25 of my neighbors will pull a megawatt laser.
                        Is this a joke or something? Just half the street.
                        Well, finally it dawned on you.
                        There will be such lasers years through 7.

                        Boeing YAL-1
                      8. 0
                        6 August 2019 12: 59
                        Quote: Flamberg
                        Is this a joke or something? Just half the street.

                        I live in a private house. My colleagues are in homes where on 90 apartments. A third of their homes are powered by a laser.

                        Quote: Flamberg
                        Boeing YAL-1

                        Where? When? How?
                      9. 0
                        6 August 2019 20: 05
                        Quote: Flamberg
                        And they don’t put it because there are no such lasers?

                        They put air defense, from Tor-2U to C300.
                      10. +1
                        6 August 2019 19: 48
                        The purpose of the experiment was to create the conditions for thermonuclear fusion. 192 stadium lasers were used to uniformly compress and heat. And in principle, they were kicked out of the stadium a long time ago, and the project was severely cut funding, if not completely closed.
                      11. 0
                        21 August 2019 13: 11
                        Quote: professor
                        then you don’t need a megawatt power supply at all.

                        However, you will need a power storage and switch ... bully
                        Quote: professor
                        With an efficiency of 48%, you have 2 megawatts

                        if not a secret - what pulsed laser has such an efficiency? hi
                      12. +2
                        6 August 2019 18: 16
                        What kind of "expert" wrote the article? Is there a laser hole in a drone? Who saw burns in metal with metal ends rounded inward !? Moreover, the hole is not quite even, which should be from the beam. All the rest of the writing loses its meaning.
                      13. -1
                        7 August 2019 03: 19
                        This pressed fiberglass is most likely.
                      14. 0
                        20 August 2019 22: 51
                        The hole owes nothing to anyone, anything can be
                    2. +3
                      6 August 2019 10: 03
                      I will correct you only in that the problem with the energy source is up to a certain scale. For hand weapons that is.

                      Well, a large infantry fighting vehicle or tank, and so the engine is almost a megawatt. A modern generator (the electric machine itself) is a rather compact thing.

                      Plus, such a chic reason to switch to electric transmission)
                      1. -5
                        6 August 2019 10: 11
                        Well, if there is no problem, why does nobody really use lasers?
                      2. +4
                        6 August 2019 10: 18
                        Because the problem is to create the laser itself.
                      3. -1
                        6 August 2019 10: 20
                        Yes? And what exactly is this problem? The laser principle is as simple as 2 pennies.
                      4. +5
                        6 August 2019 10: 23
                        The problem is that no one has yet created a compact laser of sufficient power, contrary to your statement above.

                        Otherwise, “megawatts the size of a refrigerator,” or even a wagon, would already be on the same zwomalt or another ship, where five megawatts of power are not a problem.
                      5. +2
                        6 August 2019 10: 41
                        And maybe just because the laser is easy to counteract and do not do it just because nobody seriously uses the laser.
                      6. +1
                        6 August 2019 10: 44
                        Well, then give an example (with reference) of a "megawatt laser" suitable for installation at least on a ship.
                      7. -3
                        6 August 2019 10: 47
                        Boeing YAL-1
                      8. +6
                        6 August 2019 16: 46
                        Quote: Flamberg
                        Boeing YAL-1

                        The program which was eventually covered up.
                        First, it is chemical laser. More precisely, a six-module IR chemical oxygen-iodine laser (COIL), in which each module weighed 3 tons. Moreover, he worked in a pulsed mode.
                        Secondly, for his work chlorine gas, molecular iodine, a solution of hydrogen peroxide and potassium hydroxide are fed into the laser. And now we’ll go to the battlefield with all this. smile
                        Thirdly, during the operation of the laser, the flow velocity in the reaction and generation region approaches the speed of sound. Ideal for ground laser. smile
                      9. -1
                        6 August 2019 17: 04
                        1mw laser? At 1 MW! wink
                      10. -1
                        6 August 2019 20: 05
                        Quote: Flamberg
                        1mw laser? At 1 MW! wink

                        No. Not 1 Megawatt, but "megawatt class". How much he developed is not clear, but it is clear that now the Americans promise to create Megawatts only after 7 years.
                      11. 0
                        21 August 2019 13: 18
                        Quote: professor
                        Now the Americans promise to create a megawatt in only 7 years.

                        promise is not bad ...
                      12. 0
                        21 August 2019 13: 14
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        And now we will go to the battlefield with all this

                        But what is more dangerous than a conventional explosive? bully
                      13. 0
                        21 August 2019 13: 23
                        Quote: ser56
                        But what is more dangerous than a conventional explosive?

                        The presence of chlorine in the starting components. And we still have to see what it will have in the exhaust. So you can get into the category of "weapons of mass destruction". smile
                      14. +1
                        7 August 2019 16: 50
                        Yes? And what exactly is this problem? The laser principle is as simple as 2 pennies

                        The problem is in focusing systems (lens), more than one suitable material can not withstand such an energy flux and, in fact, the setup itself will melt from the interaction of the atmosphere and the photon flux at the exit after the lens. To do this, an adaptive lens is used, roughly speaking, many low-power lasers focusing at one point in space, which is very difficult to ensure (this is the only way to create something of the megawatt class) that can work at least somehow.
                      15. 0
                        21 August 2019 13: 13
                        Quote: Sancho_SP
                        then the problem is to create the laser itself.

                        not only - the laser hits only in a straight line ... request
                      16. 0
                        6 August 2019 10: 25
                        Silicon carbide laser diodes with a specific power of 25 kW per square cm in the form of a matrix are scaled to megawatts, the problem is in another - a matrix cooling system operating with an efficiency of 50%.
                      17. +1
                        6 August 2019 18: 06
                        The problem has not been with the laser for a long time. These lasers are designed for every taste and size. And just that the Turks decided. Pointing to one point.
                  2. +1
                    7 August 2019 19: 31
                    Irrelevant. What is the specific gravity of the battery in your cell phone? Does that make any sense? After all, you carry the entire mobile phone in your pocket, and not in parts. Moreover, in advanced devices, the battery is not removed at all.
                    Dear, and if the battery of your mobile weighed 5 kilograms for example. You carried it in what pocket ?!
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. +3
          6 August 2019 10: 26
          Which is cheaper - a laser system or MANPADS?
          1. +2
            6 August 2019 10: 45
            On the first shot, it is likely that MANPADS. But on the thousandth ..
            1. +2
              6 August 2019 11: 53
              But in the thousandth.

              And for the thousandth in a laser installation, the dofig will have to be changed, for example, in drives.
          2. +3
            6 August 2019 16: 49
            Quote: Operator
            Which is cheaper - a laser system or MANPADS?

            Good question.
            But there is one more thing - what to do with those goals that MANPADS do not capture?
            1. -3
              6 August 2019 16: 54
              Change the matrix seeker to an HD video camera from a smartphone - at the same time, and the price will decrease.

              To deal with low-speed drones, penny rocket-propelled grenade launchers equipped with homing grenades with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead and the same HD video camera are even more suitable.

              And then a little squeak from the sky is heard - give me a megawatt laser right away (the budget is visible, however) laughing
              1. +5
                6 August 2019 18: 06
                Quote: Operator
                Change the matrix seeker to an HD video camera from a smartphone - at the same time, and the price will decrease.
                To deal with low-speed drones, penny rocket-propelled grenade launchers equipped with homing grenades with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead and the same HD video camera are even more suitable.
                And then a little squeak from the sky is heard - give me a megawatt laser right away (the budget is visible, however)

                It is best to cut the budget just on "cheap homing grenades". Because, firstly, they will come out as a result not a penny, but, secondly, you think - how many such grenade launchers and grenades can be pushed into the armed forces - "give a fighter with an UAV in each platoon!".

                In general, with lasers, everything depends on the effective range. Because at a distance of up to 2 km, instead of a "laser with a unique system of keeping the beam at one point of the target", it is easier to install an uninhabited module with a 14,5-mm CPV (with MDZ bullets) and an optoelectronic guidance system. smile
              2. +1
                6 August 2019 23: 10
                Moreover, all megawatts will go down the drain when a small cloud appears. He is very weather dependent on this laser.
                1. 0
                  7 August 2019 07: 44
                  Quote: Slon379
                  Moreover, all megawatts will go down the drain when a small cloud appears. He is very weather dependent on this laser.


                  Do not leave, it will weaken the radiation of interest on 20.
                  Heavy fog when shooting along the ground (namely along, not higher than 50 meters), yes, it will weaken more. And with increasing altitude, the transparency of the atmosphere increases.
                  1. 0
                    20 August 2019 23: 00
                    Right on 20? And of course, you know nothing about non-linear effects. About turbulence too?
      3. +1
        6 August 2019 11: 51
        Huge problem

        Well you professor at first inattentively read and then yulit.
        They write to you
        compact and powerful generator,

        how much of a 750 kg battery

        50kg laser, 100kg control system, 600kg goes to the power source.


        Are you irrelevant
        In your opinion, the nuclear power plant does not have enough energy to power the laser counter-air defense of this station?

        You yourself know the answer, because it will be not air defense but air defense of nuclear power plants which no one needs.

        They have a power supply for 192 lasers at the same time, but there is no one laser with equivalent power.

        Are you so joking? Not funny.

        The main problem of laser weapons is the lack of a compact power source.
        Other problems are less significant.
        Yes they are
        - Actually the power of the laser itself
        heat removal
        - laser retention system on target

        BUT IF MAKING A COMPACT SOURCE OF MEGAWATIC CLASS all other problems will be solved or bypassed
        1. +2
          7 August 2019 00: 42
          Quote: bk316

          BUT IF MAKING A COMPACT SOURCE OF MEGAWATIC CLASS all other problems will be solved or bypassed

          Capacitor. With power from a diesel or turbo generator. Already found and are actively improving. The problem with the effectiveness of a laser as an air defense system is the strong attenuation and scattering in the atmosphere. It is not suitable for long distances, especially if haze, fog, cloudiness, just high humidity.
          But in the tactical link and in the conditions of Libya it turned out. The Turks. But here in the Baltic states, Siberia, in the Arctic, it is unlikely to succeed. The Turks made a laser for their own theater. And they can be congratulated.
          And in our conditions it is more rational to use the ZPU combat module. And in the Middle East theater too.
      4. +1
        6 August 2019 13: 15
        Quote: professor
        The huge problem is to create a powerful and efficient laser.

        Now the problem is only in size and efficiency
        but soon even powerful lasers will be semiconductor, which is compact and not the last.
        a small revolution in optics has already taken place, which allows us to make compact focusing and sighting devices
        all this is just a problem of investment, not technology.
        The problem remains only heavy-duty lasers for long-range exposure, which the Americans put on a Boeing. But for simple tactical purposes, everything is much simpler.
        1. 0
          6 August 2019 19: 48
          Now the problem is only in size and efficiency

          That's right, but I'm not sure about it
          but soon even powerful lasers will be semiconductor

          there is a theoretical limit there.
          1. 0
            7 August 2019 10: 32
            Yes there is no limit. no one canceled a death star to collect a beam from several sources.
            1. 0
              7 August 2019 18: 35
              no one canceled a death star to collect a beam from several sources.

              Only 10 kilowatt lasers is not one 10 kilowatt laser. Does the word coherence say nothing? laughing
              1. 0
                20 August 2019 23: 02
                There are non-trivial difficulties with phasing lasers, if you mean it
    2. 0
      6 August 2019 14: 08
      the problem is to create a battery for him.
      I agree, for some reason, our overexposure is a complex of several caravans, and here is a jeep. Not otherwise, the Turks guessed the secret of energy transfer ... hi
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 12: 17
        Quote: OlfRed
        I agree, for some reason, our overexposure is a complex of several caravans, and here is a jeep.

        Can you put a welding arc machine in a jeep?
        here the laser is the same, only the efficiency is about 4-5 times lower and as indicated, there is a problem of accurate focusing during the period.
        1. 0
          7 August 2019 12: 31
          sorry, but where does it
          can you put a welding arc machine in a jeep?
          Does it seem to you, dear, that these are several "other" systems ... We were not given the characteristics - power, consumption, what is pumping there ... So you said about efficiency, then the more the question arises - where to get energy and opportunity keep the laser working for a certain time, therefore, it must still carry a trailer, in general there are more questions than information in general ... This is what I'm telling you as a sofa specialist ... wassat hi
          1. +1
            7 August 2019 12: 34
            Quote: OlfRed
            he must still drag the trailer

            In my yard, in my childhood, a tractor Belarus often traveled with a trailer for an arc welding generator
            in both jeeps, which are shown in the photo, this device fits with a bang
            moreover, he even gets into the trunk of my car.
            and the Turks, I’m sure, have a much better product.
            1. 0
              7 August 2019 12: 46
              Ie you are only confused by the size of the "box", like it will not fit, and the rest is 10 ... I probably do not understand something. There are no MBs at all
              arc welding machine
              , and the laser power comes from the nearest power line, then I have no questions
              1. +2
                7 August 2019 12: 50
                probably we have discrepancies in the required power.
                I think that 300 kilowatts were enough for the Turks
                a compact generator with such power make a problem?
                in my opinion this can be done even with a gasoline engine, and with a turbine of the same size - even more powerful.

                why i took 300
                in the laboratory, an x-ray laser with such power burned 3 mm steel in front of my eyes. Not immediately, but in a few seconds.
                1. 0
                  7 August 2019 13: 07
                  probably we have discrepancies in the required power.
                  most likely, there is not much power laughing
                  I think that 300 kilowatts were enough for the Turks
                  a compact generator with such power make a problem?
                  here, I agree with you, but I’m not sure of the other - will there be enough power for a greater distance, how long will it burn? As I understand it, it all the same seems to be not only in power (I contradict myself), namely in aiming and holding the target, that is, to hold the laser focus for longer ... But damn it is somehow solid and not guaranteed, the target can already or fly away or do nasty things, but again there was a test of the pen and flaws with errors will be fixed, and so the Turks are great, we would have poured so much dough, but into science hi
                  1. 0
                    7 August 2019 13: 33
                    The annual expenses of the Turks for the development of laser technology are equal to 450-480 million dollars. over the past 10 years. That is, over 10 years they spent about 4.5 mln.dol. to develop this industry.
                2. 0
                  20 August 2019 23: 05
                  What is that X-ray laser there? Really with a nuclear pump, like the Americans? laughing
        2. 0
          7 August 2019 18: 38
          Can you put a welding arc machine in a jeep?

          What kind of welding machine is 50 kW?
          Is that cooking with two-centimeter electrodes?
    3. +1
      6 August 2019 18: 04
      .
      Quote: Flamberg
      In the future laser arms race, the Turks have already claimed a prize for themselves, and it is not a fact that this place will not be the first in the end.
      It is not a problem to create a sufficiently powerful and efficient laser, a problem is to create a battery for it. How to create a compact and powerful generator, so you can talk about the prospects of the laser.

      When T. Edison learned about the flight of the Wright brothers, he said that their plane was a useless contraption, since it could not take off vertically. Airplanes still take off not vertically
  2. +4
    6 August 2019 04: 43
    Turks have always been distinguished by their pragmatism ... There is an interesting "little thing", you have to adapt! They took, and collected ... Shahid-mobile with a laser. It is quite possible that both the industrial and the guidance system were not "invented", but adapted from something quite utilitarian ... And well done! Wipe your nose on everyone who picks him up. wassat
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 12: 46
      Shahid mobile with a laser.
      no one will give you such technology, and even more so barmaley
  3. +1
    6 August 2019 04: 57
    I immediately noticed in the photo that there was practically no blow to the ground. It feels like the drone was burned on the ground. Although who knows, maybe he tried to sit while planning.
  4. +4
    6 August 2019 05: 49
    The author thickened the paint a little. An experimental laser, even though a serial car does not yet have a prototype. I will say more, compact lasers up to 1 megawatt (the size of a home refrigerator) are far from news and are widely used in the aerospace industry for precise "cutting" of metal products. This is where, for whatever reason, plasma cutters cannot be used, not new in short. Here is the marker retention system, yes, it is of interest. And then, only in terms of technical solutions. Now the development of combat lasers is on the path of reducing the pumping time of short-pulse systems. The prospect is behind them. There the scheme is such that during the interval between pulses the system is re-aimed from one target to another. That is, one millisecond pulse should be enough to destroy the object. Ideally.
    1. +1
      6 August 2019 08: 37
      .Here is the marker retention system yes, it is of interest.

      I agree, everything else is not very good. Even if you imagine that a laser tachanka was hit by a Chinese drone, it is completely incomprehensible under what conditions. According to the declared characteristics, the ceiling at it reaches 5000 m. If the Turks could be able to point and constantly keep on heating the point on the drone at such a distance in height and the hell marks at what distance in length, then yes, it would be a fierce win! The text says that in July 2018, a 500 m range threshold was set. Theoretically, if a drone that lost control was slowly planning at a low altitude and was accidentally shot down by a crew or a specially located crew on a Turkish laser cart, then it’s not clear which side it can now be credited with the ability to destroy Wing Loong class UAVs.
    2. 0
      7 August 2019 07: 46
      Quote: shinobi
      The author thickened the paint a little. An experimental laser, even though a serial car does not yet have a prototype. I will say more, compact lasers up to 1 megawatt (the size of a home refrigerator) are far from news and are widely used in the aerospace industry for precise "cutting" of metal products. This is where, for whatever reason, plasma cutters cannot be used, not new in short. Here is the marker retention system, yes, it is of interest. And then, only in terms of technical solutions. Now the development of combat lasers is on the path of reducing the pumping time of short-pulse systems. The prospect is behind them. There the scheme is such that during the interval between pulses the system is re-aimed from one target to another. That is, one millisecond pulse should be enough to destroy the object. Ideally.


      Do not make up. 500 KW laser is made IPG on special order and it takes up enough places, especially with the cooling system - https://www.ipgphotonics.com/en/products/lasers/nepreryvnye-lazery-vysokoy-moshchnosti/1-mikron/yls-1120- kvt # [yls-do-500-kvt]

      But you can most likely cram into a truck, along with a generator.
      1. -1
        7 August 2019 19: 28
        -I'm belittling you, Porthos! -
        Google "industrial lasers" and you will be happy.
  5. +1
    6 August 2019 06: 29
    The article is clearly biased, not covered by advertising of the Turkish military-industrial complex.
    With a downed drone in Libya, the story is generally muddy, everyone interprets it to the extent of their writing talent.
  6. +9
    6 August 2019 06: 58

    I do not believe!
    K.S. Stanislavsky
    1. +3
      6 August 2019 08: 49
      Judging by the diameter of the inlet, the beam gauge is 20-30 mm. It seems a bit thick for the laser.
      1. +2
        6 August 2019 10: 57
        10 mm is considered a very good laser spot. But to keep a constant 10 mm on a moving target is difficult. Therefore, 20-30 mm is an excellent result when burning.
        1. 0
          20 August 2019 23: 09
          Such naive guys. Not 10 mm, but 100 mm, say, at 1 kilometer will receive - then it will be very good
      2. -1
        6 August 2019 18: 08
        Quote: glory1974
        Judging by the diameter of the inlet, the beam gauge is 20-30 mm. It seems a bit thick for the laser.

        This is the standard deviation of the quality of the spot holding system in one place.
    2. +1
      6 August 2019 22: 25
      I don’t believe it either. At least a little, but the spot was supposed to tremble. So the paint around should have been sooty. On what the Americans showed, the paint was smoked much more, and the hole was thinner.
    3. +1
      8 August 2019 05: 57

      And I do not believe that such a non-circular hole is from a bullet)
      And why is there a smoked surface around it - because from the bullet there will be only chipped paint and rust.
  7. +8
    6 August 2019 07: 02
    I get the impression from the photo that this device was simply burned on the ground. If the debris burned in the air, it would scatter for several kilometers, and even when it hit the ground, the wings and fuselage would not lie exactly like that.
    1. +2
      6 August 2019 08: 27
      Quote: Ros 56
      The debris would fly in the air

      The hull is much less vulnerable to fire. than "tripe"
      1. 0
        6 August 2019 16: 49
        Which body is the tank? The melting point of aluminum is about 600 degrees, fiberglass would also burn. I saw that the Superjet was left just a few minutes from the plane.
        1. +1
          6 August 2019 18: 18
          Quote: Ros 56
          Which body is the tank?

          Aircraft body.
  8. +10
    6 August 2019 07: 17
    The author pulled the laser and "combat interception.
    With what fright is this "burning"?
    1. +1
      6 August 2019 10: 29
      Quote: professor
      With what fright is this "burning"?

      Actually, burning looks something like this:
      1. 0
        6 August 2019 11: 51
        Quote: Den717
        Quote: professor
        With what fright is this "burning"?

        Actually, burning looks something like this:

        Do you find many similarities?
        1. +1
          6 August 2019 11: 53
          Quote: professor
          Do you find many similarities?

          There would be similarities, I would point out. But no, it doesn’t look like ... There, in my opinion, there is some kind of hole with rusty edges, possibly cutting with an abrasive tool, a month ago. Too regular shape and even edges without bending of the metal, in the photo anyway.
          1. 0
            6 August 2019 17: 01
            "Too regular shape and smooth edges without metal bending," Enlarge the photo, look more carefully. There is no correct shape and there are no smooth edges. The similarities of your exhibited photo "Den717 (Den) Today, 10:29" are obvious.
            1. +1
              6 August 2019 17: 03
              Quote: Oquzyurd
              The similarities of your exhibited photo "Den717 (Den) Today, 10:29" are obvious.

              Did you find any similarities? Perfectly. I'm not against...
          2. 0
            6 August 2019 18: 11
            First look at laser cutting samples without gas blowing, then talk. This is a burn. Turkish installation is not a technological laser. There, gas is not supplied to the cut zone under pressure. There is nothing to blow molten metal from.
            1. 0
              6 August 2019 18: 11
              By the way, in the Turkish film this is well shown.
  9. -9
    6 August 2019 07: 47
    Well, in Russia, "combat lasers", UAVs, like VNEU for submarines, "railgun", microwave and many other "exotic" weapons from the very beginning were recognized as "dead-end paths" of development or "distant prospects", focusing on the "classics "are now reaping the benefits of such decisions. Most scientists (old and young), whose brains are in their heads, and not the "pioneer dawn" playing there, are dumped and dumped in countries where they are appreciated and well appreciated (in terms of salaries), so that Russia in this regard is "resting - nervously smokes on the sidelines. " They riveted, however, "Peresvet" is something monstrous, such as "weapons of NI" ("to frighten") with unclear what efficiency, now they will be dragged around exhibitions, proud ... smile
    1. +3
      6 August 2019 08: 42
      and where can you see the successful implementation of the projects of those same blamed scientists in the form of weapons based on new physical principles?
      1. -7
        6 August 2019 09: 19
        In Alaska. HAARP is called .....
        1. +7
          6 August 2019 10: 09
          Look more at Military Secret on RenTV, there they will not tell about such a thing.
      2. 0
        6 August 2019 20: 58
        Quote: Deathmaker
        and where can you see the successful implementation of the projects of those same blamed scientists in the form of weapons based on new physical principles?

        Type in Google I.I. Sikorsky. Check out his designs.
        1. 0
          6 August 2019 21: 17
          Quote: Monster_Fat
          ... in Russia... Most scientists ... who have brains in their heads, and not a "pioneer dawn" playing there, are dumped and dumped in countries where they are valued and well appreciated (in terms of salaries), so that Russia in this regard, "rests-nervously smokes on the sidelines"

          I will translate: our American "friend" refers to the modern Russian Federation as Russia. What can be understood from the context:

          Quote: Monster_Fat
          in Russia "combat lasers", UAVs, as well as VNEU for submarines, "railgun", microwave and many other "exotic" means of destruction from the very beginning were recognized as "dead-end ways" of development or "distant prospect", focusing on the "classics", now reaping the benefits of such decisions

          What side here

          Quote: Harry.km
          I.I. Sikorsky

          belay ?

          This is a question, buddy. wink
    2. The comment was deleted.
  10. 0
    6 August 2019 08: 28
    For once, the Turks did not plunge into history, but entered ... By the way, without sarcasm. One marker retention system is expensive.
  11. +1
    6 August 2019 08: 41
    next to the circled hole, another one is visible, exactly the same. laser shot 2 times? 2 lasers fired? or maybe everything is simpler and it was not a laser, but, say, a large-caliber sniper gun?
    1. +1
      6 August 2019 18: 14
      The laser cannot burn a moving object immediately. He hesitates. The energy of the beam is dissipated.
      Here the article is about the fact that the Turks solved the problem of keeping the spot in one place. This place still cannot be a point. This is a small area. Here the rotating projectile must be heated for a long time. It spins and the walls are thick.
      1. +1
        20 August 2019 23: 13
        The distance from which they shot down is not indicated. Without this, there is no point in discussing anything.
  12. -2
    6 August 2019 09: 32
    Now I would like to hear how "Peresvet" burned the enemy AUG ... Well, or at least shot down a carrier pigeon delivering a report with targeting to the barmaley. Well, or at least something, for example - they rubbed the optics on this death star and aimed at a potential enemy.
    1. +1
      7 August 2019 07: 51
      1. There are great doubts about Peresvet. There is a suspicion that this is either a chemical or gas-dynamic laser, that there is an outdated technology that everyone has abandoned.
      2. Unless of course there is no secret breakthrough in this direction.

      In addition, there is no information about the combination of OLS / radar and Peresvet, which will allow him to work on air targets. Most likely its purpose is to create satellites moving along known trajectories.
      Again, provided that there is no breakthrough solution in it. Secrecy is possible for the first and second reason.
  13. 0
    6 August 2019 10: 03
    Indeed, a "landmark event".
    The first combat use of the laser.
    Turks are well done.
    50 kW is enough to burn a thin metal body from 3-5 km
    1. +1
      20 August 2019 23: 14
      Have you tried? At least 1 km?
  14. 0
    6 August 2019 10: 15
    They will begin to make military UAV hulls from refractory materials, and even with an ablative coating or with a highly reflective surface (maybe specialists will come up with something else), under the protection of sensors about laser irradiation, so that the UAV can automatically "shed" from the area where it was exposed and all. In 90% of cases, it will not be possible to destroy it with a low-power laser. He will either begin to maneuver, knocking down the aiming point and constantly substituting unheated areas in automatic mode, and the operators will learn to hide behind tall trees, buildings, and other tall structures, making it difficult to accompany the sighting complex. In general, there will still be that hemorrhoid until the "arena" of the battlefield will not come out really powerful laser installations capable of "one pulse" to burn the plane.
    But "shooting" at the infantry, I remember, is prohibited by the Convention on Permitted Used Weapons.
    In general, there is an international agreement prohibiting laser irradiation of personnel.
    1. 0
      6 August 2019 20: 31
      And they will start to cost like a cast-iron bridge
    2. -2
      7 August 2019 07: 54
      Quote: K-50
      They will begin to make military UAV hulls from refractory materials, and even with an ablative coating or with a highly reflective surface (maybe specialists will come up with something else), under the protection of sensors about laser irradiation, so that the UAV can automatically "shed" from the area where it was exposed and all. In 90% of cases, it will not be possible to destroy it with a low-power laser. He will either begin to maneuver, knocking down the aiming point and constantly substituting unheated areas in automatic mode, and the operators will learn to hide behind tall trees, buildings, and other tall structures, making it difficult to accompany the sighting complex. In general, there will still be that hemorrhoid until the "arena" of the battlefield will not come out really powerful laser installations capable of "one pulse" to burn the plane.
      But "shooting" at the infantry, I remember, is prohibited by the Convention on Permitted Used Weapons.
      In general, there is an international agreement prohibiting laser irradiation of personnel.


      Lasers will change the course of the war. Humble yourself. And you can shoot at infantry, you can’t intentionally blind them on an ongoing basis, which the PRC, for example, will definitely put on.

      Any strengthening of the structure will greatly increase the cost, reduce range, maneuverability. This is the end of cheap drones, subcompact ammunition and similar weapons. Most likely to affect aviation.

      Laser weapons: prospects in the air force. Part of 2 - https://topwar.ru/155386-lazernoe-oruzhie-perspektivy-v-voenno-vozdushnyh-silah-chast-2.html
  15. +8
    6 August 2019 10: 16
    Three obvious BUTs:

    1. A system capable of burning a hole even from 500 meters should burn guidance systems from 10 kilometers. It is strange that blind drones have not yet been announced.

    2. The resistance of the body itself to the laser beam can be very easily increased a hundredfold. And they will do it as soon as the laser becomes at least some kind of threat.

    3. A laser of continuous action (not pulsed) is a dead end branch. That "burn" you can just something very small. Another thing is when a millisecond pulse carries energy like the same cannon shell, it only flies at the speed of light ..
    1. 0
      6 August 2019 18: 17
      All right.
      Only the pulse frequency is such that it really turns out much better. The same carbon dioxide laser does not take aluminum and copper alloys with constant radiation, and it is fine in the pulsed mode.
    2. -1
      7 August 2019 07: 59
      Quote: Sancho_SP
      Three obvious BUTs:

      1. A system capable of burning a hole even from 500 meters should burn guidance systems from 10 kilometers. It is strange that blind drones have not yet been announced.


      Yes.

      Quote: Sancho_SP
      2. The resistance of the body itself to the laser beam can be very easily increased a hundredfold. And they will do it as soon as the laser becomes at least some kind of threat.


      No, it’s impossible, it’s not easy. Resist light: protection against laser weapons. Part 5 - https://topwar.ru/156366-protivostojat-svetu-zaschita-ot-lazernogo-oruzhija-chast-5.html

      Quote: Sancho_SP
      3. A laser of continuous action (not pulsed) is a dead end branch. That "burn" you can just something very small. Another thing is when a millisecond pulse carries energy like the same cannon shell, it only flies at the speed of light ..


      It's just the opposite. Such power in a pulse will not get 100 years, and a permanent laser just needs to hold 3-10 seconds, which has already been decided by many companies.

      Many here (not about you) initially have a distrust of lasers, but this will pass - anger, denial, acceptance ...

      There is already an example of a really hit target, but they will think that this is a fake, until such messages become widespread, videos from target tracking systems appear, then the main question will be: Where do we have this?

      By the way, I thought that the first combat experience will show Israel with German lasers Rheinmetall.
      Laser weapons: ground forces and air defense. Part of 3 - https://topwar.ru/155508-lazernoe-oruzhie-suhoputnye-vojska-i-pvo-chast-3.html
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 10: 42
        I read that article. The main mistake of the article is the substitution of concepts. They consider means of protection not from spot heating, but from extensive.

        Exposure to the laser creates a high concentration of energy at a small point. The power in the 100-1000 kW with high focusing will no longer “cut or burn”, but will cause an explosive expansion of the evaporated substance. One megajoule in 0,1 second per square centimeter of surface. To what temperature can this energy heat a dozen grams of aluminum for the sake of interest, but the orders are clear.
        1. -1
          7 August 2019 11: 06
          Quote: Sancho_SP
          I read that article. The main mistake of the article is the substitution of concepts. They consider means of protection not from spot heating, but from extensive.

          Exposure to the laser creates a high concentration of energy at a small point. The power in the 100-1000 kW with high focusing will no longer “cut or burn”, but will cause an explosive expansion of the evaporated substance. One megajoule in 0,1 second per square centimeter of surface. To what temperature can this energy heat a dozen grams of aluminum for the sake of interest, but the orders are clear.


          It is possible that there are errors in the article, but we are not talking about aluminum at all. I’m just saying that protection will be difficult and expensive. And thick. And it’s possible that it’s heavy, so goodbye to dozens of relatively cheap small-sized ammunition on the external sling. And this will affect the strike power of aviation very strongly, especially on Stealth aircraft with their small compartments.

          The spot heating with a constant laser still needs to be kept there, in any case there will be a precession, and objections to the article were just talking about maneuvering and rotating targets.

          Watts are J / s. Those. a pulsed laser with a pulse duration of 1 second, equivalent in the transmitted energy to the 100 kW laser in 10 seconds, should produce pulse energy 1 MJ, 300 kW - 3 MJ, 1 MW - 10 MJ.

          The second question is at what depth the blasting process can extend, perhaps this will only worsen the damaging properties, since by analogy with ablation protection, the destruction of the material will take energy, and as a result, the target with a small hole will calmly continue flying. In the case of constant exposure for 5010 seconds, the thermal energy of heating the body is transferred inside and acts on the sub-shell elements - electronics, fuel lines, etc.

          In general, now all military honorable type lasers are not being developed. According to all forecasts, even promising lasers up to 1 MW should be with a constant mode of operation.
    3. +1
      20 August 2019 23: 18
      1. A system capable of burning a hole even from 500 meters should burn guidance systems from 10 kilometers. It is strange that blind drones have not yet been announced.
      - hard to get, that's all. Well, power drops about quadratically
  16. 0
    6 August 2019 10: 25
    Quote: shinobi
    I will say more, compact lasers up to 1 megawatt (the size of a home refrigerator) are far from news and are widely used in the aerospace industry for precise "cutting" of metal products. This is where, for whatever reason, plasma cutters cannot be used, no new shorter.

    If you are not in the subject, then you should not fantasize. Industrial laser cutters are no longer a novelty - yes! And they cut steel up to 20 mm thick. The laser cuts much more accurately than plasma, and the seam is almost flat. Plasma is cut only in construction and shipbuilding. But the bottom line is that the DISTANCE between the laser source and the cut surface, in laser cutters, is millimeters! The trouble with laser weapons is that the atmosphere strongly absorbs radiation, especially wet and dusty. And so the Turks shot down in clear, dry weather a light UAV, not protected at all, and not at all ready for such an impact. Tape this UAV with a mirror film, launch it in rainy weather, and there will be no sense from that laser, from the word at all.
    1. 0
      6 August 2019 18: 20
      Given the placement on a regular car, a good addition to traditional means is obtained. Drones are now a problem. Kinetic weapons are hard to hit. And the laser has a crazy reaction speed. UAV and weather may not help. In order to see something from him, one must fly closer to the ground.
      1. 0
        6 August 2019 22: 45
        Against drones, a laser is the cheapest and most effective weapon.
        1. 0
          7 August 2019 12: 18
          I think it’s more effective against electronic warfare drones.
          against the devices that the Turks used, it is very easy to defend themselves.
          1. 0
            7 August 2019 13: 01
            If the drone is in satellite communications, then electronic warfare will help little. And if the drone is on a standalone program (for example, a camcorder with a reference to a location map), then electronic warfare will not help at all.
            Enemy drones must be destroyed, and quickly - they can be shock, or even a "kamikaze" type.
            1. -1
              7 August 2019 13: 02
              I think it’s more efficient not to burn, but just to heat the device
              in this vein, it will be much more difficult to defend against lasers.
              1. -1
                7 August 2019 13: 06
                In short, it is necessary that he caught fire and fell.
                And to burn through, to set fire to a wing or a navigation block - this is the second thing. Depends on the guidance means (do they see such details?), Distances, etc.
    2. 0
      7 August 2019 08: 00
      Quote: Zoer
      Quote: shinobi
      I will say more, compact lasers up to 1 megawatt (the size of a home refrigerator) are far from news and are widely used in the aerospace industry for precise "cutting" of metal products. This is where, for whatever reason, plasma cutters cannot be used, no new shorter.

      If you are not in the subject, then you should not fantasize. Industrial laser cutters are no longer a novelty - yes! And they cut steel up to 20 mm thick. The laser cuts much more accurately than plasma, and the seam is almost flat. Plasma is cut only in construction and shipbuilding. But the bottom line is that the DISTANCE between the laser source and the cut surface, in laser cutters, is millimeters! The trouble with laser weapons is that the atmosphere strongly absorbs radiation, especially wet and dusty. And so the Turks shot down in clear, dry weather a light UAV, not protected at all, and not at all ready for such an impact. Tape this UAV with a mirror film, launch it in rainy weather, and there will be no sense from that laser, from the word at all.


      You speak completely without understanding the subject - the words are strong, a mirror, rain. There is research on all this, and all this does not work to protect against LI.
  17. -1
    6 August 2019 10: 28
    Quote: K-50
    They will begin to make military UAV hulls from refractory materials, and even with an ablative coating or with a highly reflective surface (maybe experts will come up with something else), under the protection of sensors about laser irradiation, so that the UAV can automatically "shed" from the area where it was exposed and all. He will either begin to maneuver, knocking down the aiming point and constantly substituting unheated areas in automatic mode, and the operators will learn to hide behind tall trees, buildings, and other tall structures, making it difficult to accompany the sighting complex.

    It’s just that it will launch a rocket at the source of LI and fly on to carry out the task))))
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 08: 02
      Quote: Zoer
      Quote: K-50
      They will begin to make military UAV hulls from refractory materials, and even with an ablative coating or with a highly reflective surface (maybe experts will come up with something else), under the protection of sensors about laser irradiation, so that the UAV can automatically "shed" from the area where it was exposed and all. He will either begin to maneuver, knocking down the aiming point and constantly substituting unheated areas in automatic mode, and the operators will learn to hide behind tall trees, buildings, and other tall structures, making it difficult to accompany the sighting complex.

      It’s just that it will launch a rocket at the source of LI and fly on to carry out the task))))


      There are none and it’s not easy - to make the seeker pointing at a narrow powerful beam. Even if they make a rocket hovering like some kind of secondary artifacts of the beam, then the slightest oscillation of the guidance system (second re-targeting of this rocket) will immediately burn it to the GOS.
  18. -3
    6 August 2019 10: 32
    And here is a video on testing and using the domestic laser weapon "Peresvet":



    PS Why did Turkey buy Russian C-400? And immediately tested the lasers ... Another scimitar in the back to prepare? Here, not only tomatoes can suffer)))
    1. -1
      7 August 2019 08: 03
      Quote: Rus_Balt
      PS Why did Turkey buy Russian C-400? And immediately tested the lasers ... Another scimitar in the back to prepare? Here, not only tomatoes can suffer)))


      Separated air defense.
  19. +2
    6 August 2019 12: 33
    Nevertheless, the topic of how they manage to accurately focus radiation on a target long enough for a destructive effect is not completely disclosed. In my opinion this is the most interesting and important detail in this case.
    1. +1
      6 August 2019 17: 23
      In this video, there is a test version of this weapon. It can be seen how they accompany the drone and how many seconds they make holes in the hull from a distance of 500 and 1000 m. Among other things, the laser is equipped with an additional system to counter the flock of drones, disrupting their interaction and communication with the operator. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWS6RFgx6UY This is a test version. The Turks developed this system and made it more compact. They are launched as a series, it is mainly intended to protect important objects from drone attacks.
    2. -1
      6 August 2019 22: 01
      Quote: Shuttle
      Nevertheless, the topic of how they manage to accurately focus radiation on a target long enough for a destructive effect is not completely disclosed.
      - This is precisely their company secret, for that matter (if they really shot down with a laser). Who is telling this.
  20. 0
    6 August 2019 13: 13
    Quote: K-50

    But "shooting" at the infantry, I remember, is prohibited by the Convention on Permitted Used Weapons.
    In general, there is an international agreement prohibiting laser irradiation of personnel.


    Not prohibited.
    Even more specifically, it’s very possible to burn an eye that looks into some kind of optical device:

    "It is forbidden to use laser weapons specially designed for use in hostilities, solely or inter alia in order to cause permanent blindness to the organs of vision of a person who does not use optical devices, i.e. unprotected organs of vision or organs of vision that have devices for correcting vision. The High Contracting Parties shall not transfer such weapons to any state or any non-state entity. "

    Additional Protocol to the 1995 Convention on the Prohibition and Restriction of Certain Conventional Arms
  21. -2
    6 August 2019 13: 17
    Quote: Operator
    the problem is in another - matrix cooling system

    more precisely in the heat removal system
    but on the other hand, the problem is not even in the novelty of the design, but in time for the selection of convenient solutions.
  22. -1
    6 August 2019 13: 19
    Quote: Sancho_SP
    1. A system capable of burning a hole even from 500 meters should burn guidance systems from 10 kilometers. It is strange that blind drones have not yet been announced.

    the Chinese put such a system on production tanks
  23. -1
    6 August 2019 13: 24
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    Well, in Russia, "combat lasers", UAVs, like VNEU for submarines, "railgun", microwave and many other "exotic" weapons from the very beginning were recognized as "dead-end paths" of development or "distant prospects", focusing on the "classics "

    self-propelled laser complex 1K11 "Stilet" / 1K17 "Compression"
    VNEU - new boat
    https://topwar.ru/156779-rossija-postroit-anajerobnuju-podvodnuju-lodku-za-schet-indii.html
    UAVs are also there, and they started back in the 60s in the USSR.
    in the modern Russian Federation, capital underestimates the importance of promising developments, but not a few remain in the history of the USSR and its heritage.
  24. +1
    6 August 2019 14: 32
    Spoil the author’s delight (a little).
    On 7 on July 2018, the company issued a press release stating that it had successfully tested a combat laser capable of hitting small UAVs from 500 meters
    If such performance characteristics are considered true, then it turns out that the downed UAV simply passed the moment when it was in the radius of damage by the laser. Although, in theory, he should have discovered a combat vehicle in advance, from a couple of kilometers - for sure. Well, let's say, perhaps there was no task to destroy the detected equipment immediately. In any case, the UAV flew up to the laser at an unacceptably close distance from which it could even be removed by the DShK. But now, when everyone knows that it is possible to use lasers for UAVs, nothing prevents us from adopting the appropriate tactics. Fly a little higher, destroy detected targets from a greater distance. 500 meters is a ridiculous distance by aviation standards. That's when the lasers learn to intercept targets in the range of altitudes and ranges of MANPADS - then it will make sense. But I believe that as soon as we want to guaranteed to shoot down the plane at a distance of 6-8 km, it will immediately turn into ... "Peresvet" or its dimensional analogue. And with the existing technology, it will no longer be a question of placing it in the dimensions of a "jihad mobile". Here we smoothly come to understand the question of why the Turks
    in the laser topic they occupy that niche in which the “grandees” of laser business, such as Russia and the USA, do not even think to climb.
    Simply because it is certainly possible to put a laser on a "shishiga", but the survival rate of such a laser with an effective firing range of 500 meters on the battlefield of a more or less serious war will be zero.
    1. +1
      6 August 2019 22: 48
      With a range of 5-7 km 35-50 kW lasers cope. Drones will have a hard time
      when such tactical lasers enter the composition of the military air defense.
      1. +1
        7 August 2019 08: 32
        Quote: voyaka uh
        With a range of 5-7 km 35-50 kW lasers cope. Drones will have a hard time
        when such tactical lasers enter the composition of the military air defense.


        Not only drones, all small-sized ammunition, where protection can not be put, and all ammunition with an optical seeker.
    2. +1
      7 August 2019 19: 14
      Quote: Alex_59
      with which it could even be removed DShK


      It may well be exactly what happened. A strip of smoked paint is visible next to the hole, which has been called the burn hole. This strip is just very similar to the result of exposure to a laser beam. Perhaps it was like this: the UAV was flying 500 meters away. They aimed at him with a laser, fired at him. He flies further, already 400 meters before him. We took aim a second time, fired. And he flies, now a hundred meters away. Here one Libyan in his hearts says: "Vasil Ivanovich, cut him down with a sword." Hit a couple of times from an anti-aircraft machine gun. The drone flew over the dune and sat down. The report said: "The enemy's UAV made an emergency landing after being fired by a laser installation and a machine gun." Well, the news went to the press, adjusted for sensationalism.
    3. -1
      7 August 2019 22: 43
      Quote: Alex_59
      Spoil the author’s delight (a little).
      On 7 on July 2018, the company issued a press release stating that it had successfully tested a combat laser capable of hitting small UAVs from 500 meters
      If such performance characteristics are considered true, then it turns out that the downed UAV simply passed the moment when it was in the radius of damage by the laser. Although, in theory, he should have discovered a combat vehicle in advance, from a couple of kilometers - for sure. Well, let's say, perhaps there was no task to destroy the detected equipment immediately. In any case, the UAV flew up to the laser at an unacceptably close distance from which it could even be removed by the DShK. But now, when everyone knows that it is possible to use lasers for UAVs, nothing prevents us from adopting the appropriate tactics. Fly a little higher, destroy detected targets from a greater distance. 500 meters is a ridiculous distance by aviation standards. That's when the lasers learn to intercept targets in the range of altitudes and ranges of MANPADS - then it will make sense. But I believe that as soon as we want to guaranteed to shoot down the plane at a distance of 6-8 km, it will immediately turn into ... "Peresvet" or its dimensional analogue. And with the existing technology, it will no longer be a question of placing it in the dimensions of a "jihad mobile". Here we smoothly come to understand the question of why the Turks
      in the laser topic they occupy that niche in which the “grandees” of laser business, such as Russia and the USA, do not even think to climb.
      Simply because it is certainly possible to put a laser on a "shishiga", but the survival rate of such a laser with an effective firing range of 500 meters on the battlefield of a more or less serious war will be zero.



      Lasers already allow this, but most likely not Turkish. But German - Rheinmetall, or the latest American models, with a capacity of about 100 kW.
  25. -1
    6 August 2019 14: 37
    It is not long until the moment when "combat" lasers will "baptize" the battlefield, leaving the blind on it en masse. An enemy soldier with scorched eyes. And when this happens, they will stop taking prisoners in such a war. I am afraid that including the peaceful. And then the military of all countries, in whom there is still a drop of reason, will do absolutely everything to destroy the country that used such weapons. Hitler did not use combat chemistry, although it would seem that he had absolutely nothing to lose.
    Well...
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 08: 31
      Quote: Mikhail3
      It is not long until the moment when "combat" lasers will "baptize" the battlefield, leaving the blind on it en masse. An enemy soldier with scorched eyes. And when this happens, they will stop taking prisoners in such a war. I am afraid that including the peaceful. And then the military of all countries, in whom there is still a drop of reason, will do absolutely everything to destroy the country that used such weapons. Hitler did not use combat chemistry, although it would seem that he had absolutely nothing to lose.
      Well...


      With the power that you plan to bring to the battlefield, you won’t get blind there - there will be a hole to the back of the head, brains will boil like in a pressure cooker.

      Soldiers will need to make suits with protection against accidental defeat with optical isolation such as camera displays.
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 09: 06
        There will be no hole. Under the beam that burns the brick, people poked their hands, and nothing. Well, that is, there’s absolutely nothing, but you should not expect laser guns from Star Wars.
        1. -1
          7 August 2019 09: 09
          Quote: Mikhail3
          There will be no hole. Under the beam that burns the brick, people poked their hands, and nothing. Well, that is, there’s absolutely nothing, but you should not expect laser guns from Star Wars.


          How is it? I have a 2-watt laser pointer, it burns matches from two meters, cuts bags, heats the onion a lot. When the beam is directed "stop" pain as from a prick with a needle or awl.

          Pistols are definitely not worth the wait, but as an auxiliary under-barrel rifle unit to disable optics completely.
          1. +1
            7 August 2019 09: 13
            Quote: AVM
            Pistols are definitely not worth the wait, but as an auxiliary under-barrel rifle unit for optics failure

            I don't understand, but is it considered non-kosher with a bullet to "disable the optics"?

            Hang a pound of weight + obviously capricious + power-demanding device on the "rifle" - Oh, YES !! laughing
            1. 0
              7 August 2019 09: 17
              Quote: Cat Man Null
              Quote: AVM
              Pistols are definitely not worth the wait, but as an auxiliary under-barrel rifle unit for optics failure

              I don't understand, but is it considered non-kosher with a bullet to "disable the optics"?

              Hang a pound of weight + obviously capricious + power-demanding device on the "rifle" - Oh, YES !! laughing


              Pool, try to get into the optics for 2-3 km sniper or ATGM calculation. Modern diode and solid-state lasers are compact and inconsequential.
              1. 0
                7 August 2019 09: 57
                Quote: AVM
                ... to get into optics beyond 2-3 km ...

                What is this task? And who should do it? What do we "get" into? And how to see those optics "for 2-3 km"? Eyes? It is unlikely...

                Nobody shoots from a "rifle" for 2-3 kilometers, that is, "for each rifle" such a laser is obviously not needed. And in general - on the "rifle" he is superfluous, IMHO.

                And the tank, for example, already has a laser rangefinder. It is quite a working device, the crows (on which I once "tested" it), will confirm laughing
                1. -1
                  7 August 2019 12: 49
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  Quote: AVM
                  ... to get into optics beyond 2-3 km ...

                  What is this task? And who should do it? What do we "get" into? And how to see those optics "for 2-3 km"? Eyes? It is unlikely...

                  Nobody shoots from a "rifle" for 2-3 kilometers, that is, "for each rifle" such a laser is obviously not needed. And in general - on the "rifle" he is superfluous, IMHO.

                  And the tank, for example, already has a laser rangefinder. It is quite a working device, the crows (on which I once "tested" it), will confirm laughing


                  They do not shoot from a rifle (not a sniper one), but from an ATGM easily. For example, when reconnaissance, when detecting the calculation of ATGMs with binoculars or a thermal imager, it is quite possible to spoil their optics.

                  The tank has no auto guidance on enemy optics. But in general, the appearance on the tank of laser defensive weapons is a matter of time.
          2. +2
            7 August 2019 09: 14
            It hurts because you hold your hand for a long time under the beam. Pass your hand through the beam at some speed - how are you feeling? What is this idea - about the failure of optics? Where did you get all this ?! Well, yes, Compression had just such a code, but this is a Russian military development, they never wrote the full truth!
            You from a grenade launcher will not just fall into a sniper, you will stick a beam into his sight ?! Sorry, why do you need lasers, machine guns, machine guns and guns? You will lie down behind the parapet of the trench, and kill a couple of enemy platoons, if the level of total losses in 17% is exceeded, he will scatter himself, at least this is the NATO standard.
            With such inhuman accuracy, no frills are needed ...
            1. 0
              7 August 2019 09: 19
              Quote: Mikhail3
              It hurts because you hold your hand for a long time under the beam. Pass your hand through the beam at some speed - how are you feeling? What is this idea - about the failure of optics? Where did you get all this ?! Well, yes, Compression had just such a code, but this is a Russian military development, they never wrote the full truth!
              You from a grenade launcher will not just fall into a sniper, you will stick a beam into his sight ?! Sorry, why do you need lasers, machine guns, machine guns and guns? You will lie down behind the parapet of the trench, and kill a couple of enemy platoons, if the level of total losses in 17% is exceeded, he will scatter himself, at least this is the NATO standard.
              With such inhuman accuracy, no frills are needed ...


              No, it hurts instantly, and it hurts a lot, there’s a small burn on my arm right away.

              The idea of ​​putting optics out of action is not mine, the PRC is already launching such a weapon in the form of a rifle.

              I don’t know what to write about the rest, the meaning is incomprehensible.
              1. +3
                7 August 2019 09: 27
                Yes, a tree-stick, many produce such "rifles", blessing the mind for this is not necessary. But none of those who have a brain in their head thinks that a soldier will fall into the enemy's scope! Such a trick was very difficult for Zaitsev, and the hit was accidental. Of course, all this has only one way of using it - to search the enemy's positions with a beam, looking for observers who will instantly burn out their eyes. And in the attack - to drive along the attacking line, burning out everyone's eyes.
                Another question is who decides to apply it. When someone leaves a crowd of helpless blind people on the battlefield, the soldiers of the other side will become ... In general, the one who does this will be extremely powerful. Deadly rake.
                The eyes are a vulnerable optical device, much more vulnerable than a sight. Slightly smeared a beam over them, and burned out the fundus. And on the optics of the sight, you will have to hold the beam for several seconds, a fleeting touch will not destroy anything, it will only turn into a blind sniper.
                Regarding the human body ... have tried, believe me. There is complicated physics and chemistry, I have no time to set forth. A living body is much more resistant than dead materials to laser radiation. Only the eyes are very vulnerable.
                1. -1
                  7 August 2019 09: 39
                  Quote: Mikhail3
                  Yes, a tree-stick, many produce such "rifles", blessing the mind for this is not necessary. But none of those who have a brain in their head thinks that a soldier will fall into the enemy's scope! Such a trick was very difficult for Zaitsev, and the hit was accidental. Of course, all this has only one way of using it - to search the enemy's positions with a beam, looking for observers who will instantly burn out their eyes. And in the attack - to drive along the attacking line, burning out everyone's eyes.
                  Another question is who decides to apply it. When someone leaves a crowd of helpless blind people on the battlefield, the soldiers of the other side will become ... In general, the one who does this will be extremely powerful. Deadly rake.
                  The eyes are a vulnerable optical device, much more vulnerable than a sight. Slightly smeared a beam over them, and burned out the fundus. And on the optics of the sight, you will have to hold the beam for several seconds, a fleeting touch will not destroy anything, it will only turn into a blind sniper.
                  Regarding the human body ... have tried, believe me. There is complicated physics and chemistry, I have no time to set forth. A living body is much more resistant than dead materials to laser radiation. Only the eyes are very vulnerable.


                  If I understand correctly, then in the technique, optics is first detected by reflecting the scanning defocused laser radiation, then a means of destruction is directed at the delicate night vision devices, thermal imagers, camera arrays.

                  Perhaps in hand weapons they realize something similar.
                  1. +3
                    7 August 2019 09: 45
                    Ep ... Do you even understand what you are writing? Oh, it came. Probably never worked with your hands in your life? At least go to the shooting gallery somehow. Try to hit something from at least 15 meters. To "realize this in hand-held weapons" not once by accident, but on a permanent basis, you need a drive weighing half a ton, which will aim. Only such a thing is capable of aiming from time to time with due accuracy on a sight with an optics size of five centimeters.
                    A young man, if you do not master some skill that will help your hands increase accuracy and flexibility, your thinking will always be inferior. It was precisely the difficult and precise work with your hands that started thinking, and not vice versa.
                    1. -2
                      7 August 2019 10: 54
                      Quote: Mikhail3
                      Ep ... Do you even understand what you are writing? Oh, it came. Probably never worked with your hands in your life? At least go to the shooting gallery somehow. Try to hit something from at least 15 meters. To "realize this in hand-held weapons" not once by accident, but on a permanent basis, you need a drive weighing half a ton, which will aim. Only such a thing is capable of aiming from time to time with due accuracy on a sight with an optics size of five centimeters.
                      A young man, if you do not master some skill that will help your hands increase accuracy and flexibility, your thinking will always be inferior. It was precisely the difficult and precise work with your hands that started thinking, and not vice versa.


                      I understand, and I can shoot, and with my hands everything is in order. And how do you think a sniper on 2,5 km works? And with the laser there is no wind drift, no ballistic trajectory, no recoil, nor many other negative factors. Moreover, it is quite possible to compensate even when shooting with hand-held trembling stabilized prism, as in the lenses of smartphones.
                      1. +2
                        7 August 2019 16: 33
                        I like talking to a bot ...
                      2. -2
                        7 August 2019 22: 40
                        Quote: Mikhail3
                        I like talking to a bot ...


                        Talk to the mirror, maybe let it go.
  26. "Well, here, you know, you have to run as fast just to stay in the same place, and to get to another place, you need to run twice as fast." L. Carroll.
  27. [quote = Flamberg] That's the question ....
    Here I also have a question like yours:

    how much the battery weighs and how much the laser itself ....
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 08: 29
      [quote = Lieutenant Colonel of the Air Force of the USSRF in reserve] [quote = Flamberg] That's the question ....
      Here I also have a question like yours:

      how much the battery weighs and how much the laser itself .... [/ quote]

      There or a nuclear power plant, if ours made a breakthrough in lasers (in extreme cases, a powerful generator) or a stock of chemical components, if there is junk inside.
  28. 0
    6 August 2019 15: 02
    The future lies in cryogenic technologies and high-temperature mirrors. laughing laughing laughing
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 08: 28
      Quote: Captive
      The future lies in cryogenic technologies and high-temperature mirrors. laughing laughing laughing


      Forget about mirrors. Or ablation protection, or a combination of a refractory outer casing and an internal heat-insulating material.

      But immediately the question arises, how to close the GOS. If radiolucent materials can still be developed, then the optical seeker seems to be coming to an end.
  29. -1
    6 August 2019 17: 40
    The world's first use of a laser on a combat vehicle was made in the USSR in 1984. Then our military gave a laser pulse from the Terra-3 installation to the US Challenger spacecraft, in retaliation for their imitation of a nuclear attack on Moscow from space. The impulse was relatively weak, it only disabled part of the spacecraft's onboard equipment, and the astronauts felt temporary discomfort.
    1. -1
      7 August 2019 22: 39
      Quote: Nick
      The world's first use of a laser on a combat vehicle was made in the USSR in 1984. Then our military gave a laser pulse from the Terra-3 installation to the US Challenger spacecraft, in retaliation for their imitation of a nuclear attack on Moscow from space. The impulse was relatively weak, it only disabled part of the spacecraft's onboard equipment, and the astronauts felt temporary discomfort.


      A beautiful fairy tale ... Go and see if it was or not. The most interesting thing is that many people believe in damage to a spacecraft in orbit by a laser with a power of the order of 1 MW, but they do not believe that a five-kilometer missile can be shot down with a 100 MW laser.
  30. +2
    6 August 2019 18: 03
    nice comments! But someone got up from the couch and checked: And how many cloudless hours per year over our homeland, what is the% of cloudy hours .. Maybe then it will become clear why military customers are dumb?
    1. -1
      7 August 2019 08: 09
      Quote: Siberian54
      nice comments! But someone got up from the couch and checked: And how many cloudless hours per year over our homeland, what is the% of cloudy hours .. Maybe then it will become clear why military customers are dumb?


      Yes, you forget about the clouds, as you can already say that this is not tank armor. Perfectly it passes with a laser, albeit with a partial loss of power.
      1. +1
        20 August 2019 23: 39
        Not at all. More precisely, not at all. It depends on how much power
  31. -3
    6 August 2019 18: 24
    Quote: Alexey RA
    It is best to cut the budget just on "cheap homing grenades"

    It is about something like OG-7В or RPG-18.
  32. -2
    6 August 2019 21: 02
    The Turks were ahead because no one takes them seriously.
    1. +2
      6 August 2019 22: 51
      Turks are a warring army. They are fighting in Syria, Iraq, Libya.
      All the news of their military industry are immediately sent to test in battle. Correctly.
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 02: 46
        Russia, too, has tested a lot of its arsenal, both old and new, and the commanding staff has gained combat experience, unfortunately, military experience, apparently, is impossible to gain without loss.
  33. -2
    6 August 2019 22: 46
    The Turks were ahead because the rest of the participants in the race considered the range of defeat in 500m, apparently not enough to fool. And for a given range and target characteristics, it turned out "Peresvet"
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 08: 06
      Quote: Newone
      The Turks were ahead because the rest of the participants in the race considered the range of defeat in 500m, apparently not enough to fool. And for a given range and target characteristics, it turned out "Peresvet"


      Most likely, Rheinmetall is ahead of all, just Germany is not fighting ...
  34. -1
    7 August 2019 09: 52
    Here the poison will be needed for the laser, the gross domestic product has GDP))) The Turks will not be able to do their job - a fantasy, unless someone throws it to them.
  35. 0
    7 August 2019 11: 01
    I still did not understand at what distance this laser hit the drone. At 500 meters, the drone can be shot down with a rifle or light machine gun, 1500 meters from a 14,5 mm anti-aircraft machine gun. In addition, Libya does not often rain and fog. Finally, from what distance can the drone itself attack a car with a laser?
  36. 0
    7 August 2019 12: 38
    Quote: mmaxx
    How to create a compact and powerful generator

    such a generator has long been created in the USSR - the mHD generator is called, it can give out tremendous power.
    This invention has gone to the USA, as well as the technology of using powerful lasers
    and now flies on a Boeing YAL-1
  37. 0
    7 August 2019 13: 07
    Quote: voyaka uh
    it is necessary that he caught fire and fell.

    better to come back and fall there)))
  38. -3
    7 August 2019 16: 37
    The Americans are already testing laser systems on fighter jets that shoot down (namely, shoot down, and do not interfere with visiting) rockets of the centuries. Moreover, the pilot does not need to do anything - the system itself operates autonomously. It’s a matter of time before fighters can shoot down. And then they argue that it will hit you, it will not hit you. The future is with lasers. Unlimited Bq, the ability to instantly hit the target after detection. Missiles will be slowly replaced by lasers.
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 19: 07
      Don’t give a reference? I read about testing a laser on a Boing 737, I read about intentions to install lasers on fighter jets, I didn’t see any materials about testing on fighters.
    2. -2
      7 August 2019 22: 34
      Quote: Demagogue
      The Americans are already testing laser systems on fighter jets that shoot down (namely, shoot down, and do not interfere with visiting) rockets of the centuries. Moreover, the pilot does not need to do anything - the system itself operates autonomously. It’s a matter of time before fighters can shoot down. And then they argue that it will hit you, it will not hit you. The future is with lasers. Unlimited Bq, the ability to instantly hit the target after detection. Missiles will be slowly replaced by lasers.


      It's useless. Some are fundamentally incapable of perceiving something new. They will notice changes only when the world changes so irreversibly that it will be impossible to miss this.
  39. +2
    7 August 2019 18: 04
    Turks are great. In general, it is interesting to observe how new "players" appear. Israel has risen, China, India, Iran.
    But powerful lasers have many problems:
    - Yes, mobile compact power supplies and a pump system.
    No one needs a "miracle weapon" capable of firing at a rate of every few tens of seconds.
    - high power optics. Upon reaching certain energy densities of glass, reflective and antireflection coatings begin to scatter and absorb light very significantly - up to self-destruction. To overcome these effects in ultrahigh-power scientific equipment (pico and femtosecond lasers), it is necessary to use pulse smearing-compression schemes,
    using optical nonlinear media (plasma, etc.). But such installations are still bulky and fragile.

    Great success in creating powerful technological lasers has been achieved in the international company "IPG Photonics", created by our compatriot laser physicist VP Gapontsev. They make fiber lasers pumped by laser diodes. All this in a modular design, like server racks. It is a flexible, industrially tested solution in the field of laser cutting, welding, surface heat treatment of materials. At one of the previous Naval Shows in St. Petersburg, such a stand was presented. Fiber lasers are very rugged and compact unlike other types of lasers. In fact - a coil of cable, laser diodes and "some good physics". It is very possible that the future of military lasers lies with them.

    Although, the microwave range (microwave) seems more interesting to me. As you know, the damaging effect of microwaves is wider - this is not only thermal burning, but also the electrodynamic effect on electronics. They penetrate much better through aerosols (smoke, fog), through the slots of screens, ventilation.
    Modern microwave sources are quite compact. Microwave can be obtained both by traditional sources ("radio tubes"), and by plasma oscillations, generation by laser pulses.
    In combination with phased array antennas, beam control has become much simpler and more compact than before.
    The fact that little is said about them in comparison with optical lasers may be a sign that "serious guys" like Russia and the United States are already working closely with this (as in their time, articles on atomic energy suddenly disappeared, or on radio when it became a military development).

    And the laser, imho, will be useful precisely as a means of "blinding" and "disorienting" cameras, sensors (you can create such a modulation of illumination to make the target "dizzy").
  40. 0
    7 August 2019 19: 12
    Quote: Newone
    Don’t give a reference? I read about testing a laser on a Boing 737, I read about intentions to install lasers on fighter jets, I didn’t see any materials about testing on fighters.


    https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a27376996/fighter-jet-laser/
    1. 0
      9 August 2019 18: 53
      "On April 23, according to Air Force Magazine, ground version of a laser that could someday protect military aircraft was tested at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. "
      Ground version. About fighter tests not a word.
  41. +1
    8 August 2019 01: 37
    The entire article "branchy cranberry" from start to finish ... with all the pictures and videos!
    1. Penetration into an UAV is clearly not a sign of laser burning.
    2. To really burn metal with a laser, you need to focus the beam on an area of ​​square millimeters (if anyone saw the laser cutting machine) and no hole the size of a fist will work out there ...
    3. It is impossible to keep the beam on a moving and maneuvering target for a long time! The beam is deflected by an optical-mechanical system, which even with the most accurate execution and quick reaction will not allow it ...
    ... well, and a bunch of other inconsistencies ...
    1. +1
      20 August 2019 23: 46
      Finally, at least someone mentioned holding, with an accuracy of fractions of angular sec., On an arbitrarily moving target, at kilometer distances, for several seconds, kilowatt power. Everyone thinks that this is not a problem at all. I would like to quote Lavrov
  42. -2
    8 August 2019 12: 26
    Quote: AVM
    Quote: Demagogue
    The Americans are already testing laser systems on fighter jets that shoot down (namely, shoot down, and do not interfere with visiting) rockets of the centuries. Moreover, the pilot does not need to do anything - the system itself operates autonomously. It’s a matter of time before fighters can shoot down. And then they argue that it will hit you, it will not hit you. The future is with lasers. Unlimited Bq, the ability to instantly hit the target after detection. Missiles will be slowly replaced by lasers.


    It's useless. Some are fundamentally incapable of perceiving something new. They will notice changes only when the world changes so irreversibly that it will be impossible to miss this.


    Not new, but any complex concepts. Reduced EPR, lasers, etc. Lysenko’s descendants and co: send genetics with cybernetics to the furnace without hesitation.
  43. +1
    8 August 2019 16: 17
    Quote: AVM
    Quote: Siberian54
    nice comments! But someone got up from the couch and checked: And how many cloudless hours per year over our homeland, what is the% of cloudy hours .. Maybe then it will become clear why military customers are dumb?


    Yes, you forget about the clouds, as you can already say that this is not tank armor. Perfectly it passes with a laser, albeit with a partial loss of power.

    Of course a 50 kW laser passes through rain, fog and drank with a "partial" loss of energy - about 90 - 95%. But if the drone is made of paper, it can still hit 1000 meters before he can make a dirk.
  44. +2
    9 August 2019 07: 11
    Well, as always with Timokhin: I missed all such fools, and I’m a genius on a global scale, I’ll tell you the truth ... There is no revolution in what happened. The same thing can be done right now by the Americans and the Germans. It's just that they use only polygons so far, and the Turks have chosen Libya as a "polygon".
  45. 0
    9 August 2019 12: 17
    I specially registered to post the answer here - https://gosh100.livejournal.com/251757.html#comments
    to all these illiterate fantasies.
    In short, then:
    1) no evidence, except ravings of Arab experts on Twitter
    2) the trace of the defeat cannot in any way be the burning of the laser; it should have burned the paint around.
    3) this Turkish installation according to official performance characteristics has a power of just over 1 kW, and not 50 and is capable of knocking down maximum hanging plastic quadrocopters at a distance of 500 meters
    4) laser weapons are technical nonsense and will never hit real military targets due to insurmountable physical defects
    1. +1
      20 August 2019 23: 49
      Finally a sober and constructive approach!
  46. -2
    9 August 2019 15: 27
    Quote: Gosh100
    laser weapons are technical nonsense and will never hit real military targets due to insurmountable physical disabilities


    How we are indignant))
    Or maybe Google was worth it as the American Athena cuts drones from a mile and a half?
    https://youtu.be/XH6NIazR5pA

    And Peresvet only a fake of course, but if not a fake, then only satellites can blind))
    1. 0
      10 August 2019 08: 13
      Or maybe Google was worth it as the American Athena cuts drones from a mile and a half?

      at the same time it was necessary to see that it was not combat drones, but special plastic models, flying at the test site in ideal conditions at a convenient height with a convenient angle. That's just to impress an inexperienced audience and no more.

      Relight only blinds by itself. Best case scenario. Or have you already seen how it knocks down?
  47. -2
    9 August 2019 18: 57
    Quote: Newone
    https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a27376996/fighter-jet-laser/


    The article is called: US Fighter Jets Could Soon Be Armed With Lasers or US Fighters will soon be armed with lasers.

    And now the full fragment from the article, if you don’t tear it out: On April 23, according to Air Force Magazine, a ground version of a laser that could someday protect military aircraft was tested at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. The Demonstrator Laser Weapon System, a ground-based surrogate for the Self-Protect High-Energy Laser Demonstrator, or SHiELD, shot down several aerial-launched missiles. The goal of the SHiELD program is to equip a F-15 Eagle fighter jet with a defensive laser pod by 2021.

    They clearly write that the F-15 should be equipped with this SHiELD laser system. The prototype passed ground tests during which shot down rockets centuries.
    1. +1
      9 August 2019 19: 02
      You said about fighter tests. A link to test the ground version. These different stages of development are very much advanced in time. And so I read this article already and mentioned it when I wrote about intentions install the laser on the fighter.
    2. +1
      10 August 2019 08: 17
      The article is called: US Fighter Jets Could Soon Be Armed With Lasers or US Fighters will soon be armed with lasers.

      you do not know English well, this is an incorrect translation. Could be translated as "may be". Fighters can be armed. Or they may not. And most importantly, the article deals only with the ground testing of a huge installation, which, in principle, cannot be placed on a fighter in any way. And now to make a compact one is a completely different stage, which of course is not being implemented and this project will go to the landfill like all the previous 100500 laser piu-piu.
  48. -1
    9 August 2019 19: 06
    Quote: Newone
    https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a27376996/fighter-jet-laser/


    And what does it change ?? The article says that the system should be ready by 2021. It is clear that the development stage. By the way, the article is a reprint of another winter release. So it is possible that they are already testing on fighters.

    And even a hedgehog understands that such a system on a fighter is directly tested last. Missile explosives, even without warheads around the plane, start up a risky business.
    1. 0
      10 August 2019 08: 20
      Quote: Demagogue
      So it is possible that they are already testing on fighters.

      this is exactly what is excluded. This is just your imagination. At the current level of technology does not exist in principle and there cannot exist a laser of tens of kilowatts that would be marked in a container on a fighter.
  49. -2
    10 August 2019 08: 40
    Quote: Gosh100
    Or maybe Google was worth it as the American Athena cuts drones from a mile and a half?

    at the same time it was necessary to see that it was not combat drones, but special plastic models, flying at the test site in ideal conditions at a convenient height with a convenient angle. That's just to impress an inexperienced audience and no more.

    Relight only blinds by itself. Best case scenario. Or have you already seen how it knocks down?


    Well, of course, only modelka knocks down. That is why the Americans are preparing LaWS for adoption after five years of testing on a warship.
    A more powerful 150 kilowatt Lockshid Helios system for combating PCR will be installed on a warship next year.

    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/helios.htm

    So stop writing nonsense. Lasers are the future.

    I didn’t hold a candle according to Peresvet, but if with such dimensions it only dazzles, then this is a big minus for us.
    1. 0
      10 August 2019 13: 34
      Quote: Demagogue
      That is why the Americans are preparing LaWS for adoption after five years of testing on a warship.


      that’s why the Laws project is actually closed, and another LWSD demonstrator has been started instead of it. They will also close it and start some BSLD thread, and then SHLVD and so on at infinity.

      Quote: Demagogue
      A more powerful 150 kilowatt Lockshid Helios system for combating PCR will be installed on a warship next year.


      yeah, there will be - but again to fight with plastic models and rubber boats. Someone terribly deceived you about RCC, or you could not speak English. Well, this is the same as your test on a fighter.

      So you are talking nonsense here. Like any laser apologists.
  50. -1
    10 August 2019 08: 42
    Quote: Gosh100
    Quote: Demagogue
    So it is possible that they are already testing on fighters.

    this is exactly what is excluded. This is just your imagination. At the current level of technology does not exist in principle and there cannot exist a laser of tens of kilowatts that would be marked in a container on a fighter.


    Fantasy is not mine, but yours, for this system is made specifically for fighters in the United States of America. State testing complex passes. All is clearly written for connoisseurs of English.

    And about the compactness: even if they do not fit this system in f-15, but only in b-52, say, or avax, then this is still a huge breakthrough.

    1. 0
      10 August 2019 13: 37
      Quote: Demagogue
      Fantasy is not mine, but yours, for this system is made specifically for fighters in the United States of America. State testing complex passes. All is clearly written for connoisseurs of English.


      It is done for fighters - but it is not tested on them, because it does not fit stupidly. Feel the difference. On the S-130 they already shoved a 100 kW laser (ATL project). There is an Internet video of how they long and hard burned paint on the hood of a passenger car. It was very funny. The project is of course closed.
  51. -1
    10 August 2019 14: 35
    Quote: Gosh100
    Quote: Demagogue
    That is why the Americans are preparing LaWS for adoption after five years of testing on a warship.


    that’s why the Laws project is actually closed, and another LWSD demonstrator has been started instead of it. They will also close it and start some BSLD thread, and then SHLVD and so on at infinity.

    Quote: Demagogue
    A more powerful 150 kilowatt Lockshid Helios system for combating PCR will be installed on a warship next year.


    yeah, there will be - but again to fight with plastic models and rubber boats. Someone terribly deceived you about RCC, or you could not speak English. Well, this is the same as your test on a fighter.

    So you are talking nonsense here. Like any laser apologists.


    Successive tests are underway with increasing power. One prototype replaces another. Now they are approaching 150 kilowatts. Everything is fine, work is going on. Apparently they forgot to ask you)).
    Regarding the anti-ship missiles - the goals of the program: The demonstration was an interim demonstration of a High Energy Laser mobile platform capability against light mortars and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UASs). Additional development of the laser, beam control, power, thermal management, and fire control subsystems is planned along with additional incremental demonstrations using the laser-integrated mobile platform through FY22. The incremental demonstrations will validate 50kW Counter-Rockets Artillery and Mortars (C-RAM) and Counter-UAS (C-UAS) performance in FY17, 100kW C-RAM, C-UAS and Cruise Missile Defense performance in FY20, and a culminating demonstration of Integrated Force Protection Capability -- Increment 2 Intercept (IFPC-2I) level performance in FY22. These demonstrations will validate required performance and facilitate transition to a future increment of IFPC-2I with a planned technology insertion in the 2028-2032 timeframe.

    It is clearly stated as one of the stages of system development. But these are laws, and I also wrote about Helios. Which has much more power.

    You demonstrate your knowledge of English very selectively. From the link I provided above, you could find the following:

    Rear Admiral Boxall, head of naval operations for US Navy laser weapons: "The key system for us is HELIOS, which will replace what we have now ... We have decided to put lasers on our destroyers. The first will be Preble and when we will do this in 2021, the laser will be his melee weapon, which we will continue to upgrade."

    Boxall forgot to ask you what you think about lasers))

    “Plastic models” are almost all modern UAVs. And it is precisely to protect against them that lasers are installed. Motor boats are a heap. “Swarms” of Chinese UAVs are a very real threat, and you can’t get enough armored phalanxes for all such small targets. This is also written about in the links, but you can speak English very selectively, this is already clear.
    1. 0
      10 August 2019 22: 47
      Clearly stated as one of the stages of system development

      where is this clearly stated? on some leftist site?

      Boxall forgot to ask you what you think about lasers))

      and he also forgot to tell here how he will shoot down anti-ship missiles. What is it...

      “Plastic models” are almost all modern UAVs.

      a modern attack UAV the size of a full-fledged aircraft. Just in case.
  52. -1
    10 August 2019 14: 36
    Quote: Gosh100
    Quote: Demagogue
    Fantasy is not mine, but yours, for this system is made specifically for fighters in the United States of America. State testing complex passes. All is clearly written for connoisseurs of English.


    It is done for fighters - but it is not tested on them, because it does not fit stupidly. Feel the difference. On the S-130 they already shoved a 100 kW laser (ATL project). There is an Internet video of how they long and hard burned paint on the hood of a passenger car. It was very funny. The project is of course closed.


    What does this have to do with the ancient program and the modern one? Everything moves, only your consciousness remains in place.
    1. 0
      10 August 2019 22: 48
      Despite the fact that the power was 100 kW even 10 years ago, even 100 is the same value.
  53. -1
    11 August 2019 00: 47
    The site is not leftist, and it contains excerpts from official documents. Naval lasers in the United States are under special congressional control as a promising program. They periodically ask whether more funding needs to be injected to speed things up.

    They know how to shoot down anti-ship missiles, that’s why they continue to increase the power, striving for a megawatt.

    It is supposed to shoot down UAVs with a laser, which attack the ship directly by falling on it as bombs or drop bombs while flying over it. Such UAVs are exactly like “plastic models”. They write that the system is for close combat. Shooting such cheap targets from phalanxes or missiles, while the enemy can launch hundreds of them, is extremely expensive, and the ammunition will quickly be depleted. The laser allows you to ensure combat stability. Shots for a dollar and unlimited bookmaker.
    Cruise missiles are more specialized targets on which anti-aircraft missiles can be spent, and they can also be deflected with interference. Large, expensive UAVs can also be shot down with anti-aircraft missiles; they won’t fly close (but if they do fly, it’s the same plastic that can be burned without problems).
    In the West, the concept of air defense of ships is now changing in the light of the development of UAVs, anti-ship missiles, etc. The emphasis is not on long-range air defense missiles, which Avax cannot reach, and anti-ship missile carriers will not substitute for them, but on melee weapons: numerous cheap small air defense missiles and lasers . Long-range missiles are for pros.
    The Chinese are clearing away swarms of drones, and the Americans are preparing a response. Land laser systems are no less relevant for destroying drone bombs. They are not being developed out of nothing to do.
    1. 0
      11 August 2019 09: 21
      So why didn't you refer to the official document? Again, it didn’t work out well with English, or does it make no difference to you?

      They know how to shoot down anti-ship missiles, that’s why they continue to increase the power, striving for a megawatt.

      yeah, but it turns out to be 30-50 kilowatts and the size of a truck. And the most offensive thing is that they already had a megawatt, twice. And both times his action on the target was not at all impressive. There is no question of shooting down Granit-type anti-ship missiles from an armored warhead.

      Plastic household UAVs are already shot down simply by a radar beam. Let's say the Pantsir radar knocks down a quadcopter from 500 meters guaranteed
  54. -2
    11 August 2019 11: 34
    Quote: Gosh100
    So why didn't you refer to the official document? Again, it didn’t work out well with English, or does it make no difference to you?

    They know how to shoot down anti-ship missiles, that’s why they continue to increase the power, striving for a megawatt.

    yeah, but it turns out to be 30-50 kilowatts and the size of a truck. And the most offensive thing is that they already had a megawatt, twice. And both times his action on the target was not at all impressive. There is no question of shooting down Granit-type anti-ship missiles from an armored warhead.

    Plastic household UAVs are already shot down simply by a radar beam. Let's say the Pantsir radar knocks down a quadcopter from 500 meters guaranteed


    I just gave you an excerpt from the official document. And why are you so worried about my English?)) How difficult it is with you schoolchildren, you still don’t know how to communicate normally) your English, by the way, is difficult to evaluate, since nothing has been translated, but you still demand something from me. Let's post your proofs.

    Regarding the megawatt, it was a completely different story. There was a chemical laser, and there were successes; in 1997 they blinded a satellite with it. It had its problems. Since 2004, a new program of solid-state lasers, for which there are new tasks. They consciously reduced the power, and now they are gradually moving from simple to complex.

    In terms of dimensions, there are no problems installing lasers on ships. The dimensions are determined not by the emitter, but by the energy source. That is, the problems of placement on ships begin with 300 kilowatts and above. But all this is not critical.
    They put 50 kilowatts on a striker, what kind of truck??
    The truck is Peresvet, but judging by its dimensions and intended purpose, it is no less than a megawatt.
    An ordinary civilian diesel generator per megawatt weighs about 10 tons. There's something similar or more there.

    About the death rays from the Pantsyr it’s funny, of course, but that’s all. I don’t know if you will have the opportunity to tell a swarm of Chinese kamikaze drones that the effects of the Pantsir should shoot them down, but I hope so. It’s as if military drones and civilian crafts are two different things. And civilians fly there periodically.

    You'll have to shoot and waste missiles and shells. Like recently after Israeli shelling, when Pantsyr was knocked out. After which the installation is quietly destroyed.

    For example, phalanxes can maintain continuous fire for up to 20-30 seconds. In general, the music will not play for long.

    Get ready for school, September 1st is coming soon. Read Tolstoy there or whoever they asked you.
    1. +1
      11 August 2019 13: 29
      I just gave you an excerpt from the official document

      ok, why then were you ashamed to bring him? probably because this is not an official program at all, but a speech at hearings in the form of wishlists, moreover, from 2014 and now obviously failed?

      you just live in a world of idiotic fantasies - this also applies to schoolchildren in your head..

      not to mention the ridiculous nonsense about tests on fighters, 50 kW on a striker and the like.

      you can come up with them in an endless loop.
  55. -2
    11 August 2019 16: 23
    Quote: Gosh100
    I just gave you an excerpt from the official document

    ok, why then were you ashamed to bring him? probably because this is not an official program at all, but a speech at hearings in the form of wishlists, moreover, from 2014 and now obviously failed?

    you just live in a world of idiotic fantasies - this also applies to schoolchildren in your head..

    not to mention the ridiculous nonsense about tests on fighters, 50 kW on a striker and the like.

    you can come up with them in an endless loop.


    I have given you absolutely fresh excerpts from an interview with a key person in terms of armaments in the US Navy. He explains to you in English that you can understand that HELIOS is being adopted and will replace existing systems such as phalanx, etc. Moreover, I did not quote all of his statements - laziness))) And there he compares decisions on the introduction of lasers with the burned ships of Cortez) By The links have everything. No one has changed the terms of reference for the development of laser weapons since 2014, if not before. The development stages are clearly spelled out: drones and boats, and then increasing power and aiming for missiles.

    For the striker, they would have bothered to google it themselves, his victim. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/03/21/us-army-successfully-demos-laser-weapon-on-stryker-in-europe/ Can you read it yourself or at least Google Translator?
    But even if you just turn on your brains, you can simply estimate that even a 50-kilowatt civilian diesel generator weighs about 800 kg. Engine capacity of approximately 4 liters, alternator, cooling and as per the list. The mass of the emitter itself is minimal. That is, there are no problems with installation on the Stryker platform. If you turn on the head sometimes, you can install it on both a striker and a fighter.
    Regarding the laser on an airplane, I provided links about real tests, but you only gave your own opinion. Can you imagine the power of the generators on the F-15? To make some statements? Let's get specific, or read Tolstoy.
    1. +1
      11 August 2019 18: 21
      Everything is in the links. No one has changed the terms of reference for the development of laser weapons since 2014, if not before. The development stages are clearly spelled out: drones and boats, and then increasing power and aiming for missiles.

      You bring a lot of things, and everything turns out to be lies or nonsense. I also kind of got tired of poking around in it. In particular, this quote of yours:
      -------------------------------
      Regarding the anti-ship missiles - the goals of the program: The demonstration was an interim demonstration of a High Energy Laser mobile platform capability against light mortars and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UASs). Additional development of the laser,
      -----------------------
      I repeat, it refers to 2014 (when the disastrous results were not yet known), 5 years have passed, and in general it is not about HELIOS, but about a completely different, ground-based system - HEL MD. Accordingly, we are not talking about anti-ship missiles, but about conventional Tomahawk-type cruise missiles.
      Were you unable to read the sentence before?
      What additional testing do you have planned for the HEL-MD system, and how will all of
      that testing fit into the Army's plans for a directed energy program of
      record?


      For the striker, they would have bothered to google it themselves, his victim. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/03/21/us-army-successfully-demos-laser-weapon-on-stryker-in-europe/ Can you read it yourself or at least Google Translator?


      Ahahaha. So you didn’t get the signature there - the power of this Striker is written in black and white - 5 kW.

      A MEHEL-equipped Stryker shot small UAS out of the sky using a 5-kW fiber laser over the weekend at Grafenwoehr training area in Germany. (C. Todd Lopez/Army News Service)

      You will outshine any Unified State Examination victim. Nicht ferstein again?

      You didn’t mention anything about tests on fighter jets - you were talking exclusively about ground tests. Stop lying already. There's even a photo of the installation that clearly won't fit on a plane.
      1. -2
        11 August 2019 18: 57
        I like to cheer up the victim a little before the ending)))) An expert in English, my link clearly states that the Stryker has a DEMONSTRATOR with a power of 5 kilowatts. Here's what it should have been:

        https://www.militaryaerospace.com/power/article/14037629/laser-weapon-stryker-vehicles-50kilowatt

        And we won a contract for a laser in 100 kilowatt these gentlemen: https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/05/16/dynetics-lockheed-team-beats-out-raytheon-to-build-100-kilowatt-laser-weapon/

        Power up to 100 kilowatts. You even give the name of this program, but the essence of the program is not worth studying, what it is about. And she’s talking about this: defend against rockets, artillery and mortars as well as cruise missiles and drones. An important part of the IFPC program. We Google ourselves what it is. The program could not be more relevant - the latest news on it is this week. Namely, the development of 250-300 kilowatt lasers to combat, surprise, missiles.

        https://breakingdefense.com/2019/08/newest-army-laser-could-kill-cruise-missiles/

        And why is it that the anti-ship Tomahawk is not anti-ship missiles? Do you understand the meaning of the abbreviation pkr? And you apparently don’t understand that in order to fry a missile’s optical guidance system or its electronics, you don’t need a powerful laser at all. A blind missile won't hit anywhere. But you don’t understand much at all.

        Are you generally able to perceive the information that they are trying to convey to you?

        On the plane, children's nonsense. Now, for example, a laser is being developed for a gunship to combat ground targets. For the f-15 there is a live program - look for proof that it was closed or not shielded.

        It’s too early for you to read Tolstoy, try comics first)))
        1. +2
          11 August 2019 19: 21
          Here's what it should have been:

          oh, what a pity - bullshit again. The demonstrator that is..
          So there is no 50kW Starryker yet? should it still exist? So you are lying again?
          Earlier, you wrote that they already put 50 kW on Stryker.
          Well, since they will install it and it will all work, you should have shouted. Otherwise they wanted to leave it by the 17th. Then to 18. Then to 19. Well, when, when?

          And these gentlemen won the contract for a 100 kilowatt laser:

          but haven't done anything yet. And no one has yet made even 50 kW on a mobile platform.
          What is it? Always just lies and empty promises.
          I remember Boeing also won the competition for a laser plane. They even wanted to adopt it for service. And ended it in a landfill.

          The program could not be more relevant - the latest news on it is this week.

          Only it’s not Helios again. Again a lie. So the anti-ship missile system has nothing to do with it.

          And you apparently don’t understand that in order to fry a missile’s optical guidance system or its electronics, you don’t need a powerful laser at all.

          You haven’t even heard of what modern anti-ship missiles are. Even approximately and how it differs from the usual CD. I already wrote - its head part is armored. And in fact, it can withstand enormous heat flows, since it attacks at supersonic speed. To her, any laser is like grain to an elephant.
          As a rule, there are no optical guidance systems there at all.

          You are not conveying information here, but simply raving in reality.

          For the f-15 there is a live program - look for proof that it was closed or not shielded.

          wow, the third time it dawned on you that there were no tests in the air?
          1. -3
            11 August 2019 19: 57
            I have provided specific links for specific programs. You bring again one chatter and yours IMHO. With the ancient Boeing system from 2002, which used an unpromising chemical laser, etc. Any fundamentally new weapon goes through a stage of trial and error. The one who sits straight on his butt is not mistaken.

            Specifically, according to my links, it is clearly written that lasers will be used against missiles and this is one of the main tasks. Demonstrators have been created that are already shooting down drones. They work. Rheinmetal successfully tests his systems, mines are knocked down, the Chinese are making clones of American systems.

            Even if lasers cannot shoot down anything other than drones, this is still a colossal breakthrough. Because in the war of the future, drones will be one of the main means of combat.

            Tales about armored missiles - take them to the children's garden. Such stupid statements immediately reveal a complete misunderstanding of the subject. You won't get anywhere with such a blind rocket. RLGSN in modern conditions are jammed at once or knocked down by interference. And putting afar hose on them is, to put it mildly, expensive. Only optics give a chance to hit a modern ship. But the lasers will fry the optics.

            Laser jamming is already used on fighter aircraft. The containers are already blinding the missiles with laser beams. This is apparently a revelation only for you. There is no problem in increasing the laser power and frying the rocket.

            You initially generally argued that it was impossible to hit anything with a laser, and now, having cheerfully changed your shoes, you are trying to find some inaccuracies in my words. My inaccuracies do not change your misunderstanding of this technology and stupidity.

            Read comics.
            1. +2
              11 August 2019 20: 27
              I have provided specific links for specific programs.

              Yeah, you're right, but you got them all mixed up. When you talked about the Helios marine laser, for example, you provided a link about the ground-based HEL. Saying at the same time that he will shoot down anti-ship missiles.

              Specifically, according to my links, it is clearly written that lasers will be used against missiles and this is one of the main tasks.

              here there was specifically talk about the downing of anti-ship missiles. You threatened to shoot them down any minute, citing for some reason a link to ground-based HEL. So, son, this is fantastic.

              Even if lasers cannot shoot down anything other than drones, this is still a colossal breakthrough. Because in the war of the future, drones will be one of the main means of combat.

              hahahaha, fiction is pretty stupid

              Tales about armored missiles - take them to the children's garden. Such stupid statements immediately reveal a complete misunderstanding of the subject. You won't get anywhere with such a blind rocket. RLGSN in modern conditions are jammed at once or knocked down by interference.

              Well, what can you do - these vile anti-ship missiles are designed that way, welcome to the real world!
              They use RLGSN on all anti-ship missiles without exception. And the Americans (see anti-ship missiles Harpoon), and the French, the whole world. They don’t know that only optics give a chance. So what about stupid statements?

              In general, this is amazing - broadcasting such nonsense with such an air is simply something. Reference portrait of a laser pew-pew lover.

              Laser jamming is already used on fighter aircraft. The containers are already blinding the missiles with laser beams. This is apparently a revelation only for you. There is no problem in increasing the laser power and frying the rocket.

              there was no dispute about interference and blinding, the dispute was about powerful lasers for burning.
              This is the problem - and if it did not exist, it would not have been solved for decades. And they never decided. Stop jumping from branch to branch like a monkey.

              You initially generally argued that nothing could be hit with a laser,

              So they don't hit. Not a single laser has been adopted for service. And at the training ground there, yes, all sorts of bullshit can be demonstrated.
              1. -2
                11 August 2019 20: 39
                I am writing for the last time. Because for an intelligent reader there are already enough arguments, but you don’t have the brains to understand anything.

                The most modern and currently dangerous missile for ships, LRASM, has, in addition to passive radar guidance, also an infrared guidance system. All other nonsense without comment, at this stage everything is clear.

                Read about the chicken Ryaba for children in the garden.
                1. 0
                  11 August 2019 20: 53
                  These LRASM are truly exotic, they haven’t even gone into production yet. The tests are taking place. Firstly.
                  And secondly, the optics are there only as an additional sensor and burning them, of course, will not blind the rocket. Actually, we have those too. And the guidance of anti-ship missiles is always based on radar.

                  It’s really time for you to get away a long time ago - they’ve talked through the roof of nonsense here. And you continue.
                  1. 0
                    13 August 2019 16: 41
                    It’s not in vain that you registered. Right off the bat they killed some crazy person. who, as soon as he realized that he was talking nonsense, began to be rude about schoolchildren and chickens. But considering that it’s not talent that’s even rude, it’s ridiculous.
                    A very big problem in debates at VO is that many people get some idea into their heads and do not have the courage to admit that some of their statements were hasty or incorrect. It's a sign of immaturity and quite funny, but it doesn't stop them at all.
                    It seems to me that your opponent is relying on one thing - the program states this and that in such and such a year. But these are just statements of intent, and the year the program ends is not necessarily the year the results are obtained, but only an indicator for calculating funding. If I'm not mistaken. Moreover, statements alone are not enough. There are a lot of programs that, after many years of development, were closed for one reason or another. And some grew into others and further.
                    And the most interesting thing, showing how the brain of such people works, is the next point. They are skeptical about Russian developments, since the data on them is classified and there is nothing but statements and some crumbs of information. But they unconditionally believe similar statements made by any other countries.
                    As a result, there was no need to even start arguing - the result was known in advance.
                    1. +1
                      14 August 2019 09: 56
                      I've been following this topic (and writing about it) for over 10 years now. I can immediately name more than a dozen “combat laser” projects that were started and successfully completed. This all looks very funny in dynamics.

                      And when another inexperienced laserophile, having read such promises for the first time (yes, we! next year! will install a 100500 kW laser on a buggy) and taking them seriously, begins to puff out his cheeks - well, it’s like beating a child.
                      1. 0
                        14 August 2019 17: 55
                        I look forward to your publications and to VO. Because this topic is not limited only to such installations, and there is very little information about them for an outsider.
  56. -1
    12 August 2019 20: 06
    The emphasis in the article is on maintaining the aiming point in automatic mode, at a short distance. And this is at low target speeds, with an initially weakly protected target body, in the absence of a laser irradiation detector at the target, and in the absence of protective maneuvering on the part of the UAV operator. Plus in ideal atmospheric conditions. Thus, the advertised “shahid laser” is an inflated sensation. The method of lighting a fire using 2 watch glasses and some water inside has a hundred times more benefits. But the Turks get credit for the “rational proposal”. Well, let them “patent” their health. I wish someone needed this
    1. -1
      13 August 2019 16: 44
      This is common. When the Turks came up with something, it’s a sensation, you need to collect all the rumors and statements, even the most crazy ones, and write it down for them. But when our people test or develop something, on the contrary, all possible and impossible arguments are given that we won’t succeed, it won’t work, and in general everything will be bad. In the pursuit of sensation, a reputation is acquired for talkers, but who is interested in such a word now - reputation.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"