Military Review

Laser weapons destroy a rocket at a distance of 1.5 km (video)

151
Laser weapons destroy a rocket at a distance of 1.5 km (video)

Apparently, it would not be too great an exaggeration to believe that the use of such high-tech weapons as laser guns are not far off, both military and large corporations freely share a detailed video of successful tests.



A research team from Lockheed Martin has developed a mobile (in the photo, you can estimate the approximate scale) ADAM (Area Defense Anti-Munitions) laser machine, specifically designed to destroy enemy missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Technically, ADAM is able to detect a potential threat in a radius of more than 5 km and destroy the target with a continuous laser beam at a distance from 2 km.

No other technical details, such as laser type or power consumption, are known for ADAM — probably due to the military nature of the design, but the video below can be used to evaluate how the installation works.

Over the past year, ADAM has been tested on test UAVs and simulators; Later, the task was complicated by setting a Qassam type rocket as a target, which is a solid fuel made from a pipe about the size of about 0.7 m (a mixture of white sugar and potassium nitrate KNO3 is used as fuel) capable of hitting targets from a distance from 3-x to 18 km. Such missiles with a self-made primitive launcher are used by militants of the Gaza Strip in the shelling of the territory of Israel - hence the name.

The video first shows the destruction of the rocket in real time - it is difficult to notice something, but in slow-motion repetition it is clearly visible that for a certain time the laser beam concentrates on the head part of the rocket and “leads” it for some time, which ultimately leads to its exploding in the air.
Originator:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/
151 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. fzr1000
    fzr1000 13 May 2013 17: 36
    +9
    If not a fake, then .... "Kan play dangerous ... Americans."
    1. Atrix
      Atrix 13 May 2013 17: 39
      +9
      Quote: fzr1000
      If not a fake, then .... "Kan play dangerous ... Americans."

      Of course not a fake)) The whole problem of current lasers is the power plant. But in the future, I think this will be solved, because the missiles also did not immediately become as precise and compact as they are now.
      1. KuigoroZHIK
        KuigoroZHIK 13 May 2013 17: 46
        19
        It is doubtful that this is a fake. But, as far as I remember, our design bureaus had already prepared countermeasures for such systems.

        And yet, pay attention to such a detail: in what weather does this all happen. The conditions are close to ideal. The rocket takes off, that is, the speed has not picked up yet, the weather is cloudless .... I do not want to say that the system is atstoy - I want to say that now these are the maximum capabilities of such systems. And, if you push, you can not only catch up, but also get around them.
        In any case, such weapons systems will be used in the future and we should not lag behind.
        1. patline
          patline 13 May 2013 17: 50
          18
          Missiles and planes will now make mirrored. lol
          1. Nick
            Nick 13 May 2013 23: 00
            +5
            Quote: patline
            Missiles and planes will now make mirrored.

            And if it is still possible to give the rocket a rotation around its axis, then the energy of the focused beam will "spread" over a large area and dissipate without causing harm to the rocket IMHO.
            1. patline
              patline 13 May 2013 23: 30
              +1
              Nick (1) Today, 23:00 p.m. ↑
              Quote: patline
              Missiles and planes will now make mirrored.
              And if it is still possible to give the rocket a rotation around its axis, then the energy of the focused beam will "spread" over a large area and dissipate without causing harm to the rocket IMHO.

              Only the rotation of the rocket needs to be given at the speed of light. Then the laser beam reflected from the mirror surface will cut everything around a rotating rocket. laughing
              1. Nick
                Nick 14 May 2013 09: 58
                +1
                From the point of view of modern physics, this is unattainable
                Quote: patline
                Only the rotation of the rocket needs to be given at the speed of light.
            2. Andrey Yuryevich
              Andrey Yuryevich 14 May 2013 04: 05
              +2
              lol But how is the rocket now stabilizing in flight? you smiled at me ....
              1. Nick
                Nick 14 May 2013 09: 59
                0
                Quote: Andrey Yurievich
                But how is the rocket now stabilizing in flight? you smiled at me ....

                Until today, he believed that the gyroscope orientates and stabilizes ... More precisely, it helps control systems ...
          2. bunta
            bunta 13 May 2013 23: 51
            +1
            Polishing is expensive. A chip with a program that creates random deviations from a straight path is cheaper. Already used on nuclear warheads.
            1. Nick
              Nick 14 May 2013 10: 04
              0
              Quote: bunta
              Polishing is expensive.

              The guys from the garage with a mirror film are tinted inexpensively ... (just kidding)
          3. DRUG DRUG
            DRUG DRUG 14 May 2013 05: 19
            +2
            Quote: patline
            Missiles and planes will now make mirrored. lol

            Remember, in the Soviet film "Moscow-Cassiopeia" the laser was destroyed by its own beam using a pocket mirror. Yes, it would be interesting to make rockets and equipment not only mirror-like, but also to develop a coating composition that would direct part of the laser radiation back to the installation or transmit some destructive effect along this beam, like current through wires. The system will be called "Don't touch, or it will kill" :-)))
        2. Joker
          Joker 13 May 2013 18: 25
          +5
          And yet, pay attention to such a detail: in what weather does this all happen. The conditions are close to ideal. The rocket takes off, that is, the speed has not picked up yet, the weather is cloudless .... I do not want to say that the system is atstoy

          I wrote to them on the site, asked about the weather, they answered me saying that while they were testing it, they would finish it and they would shoot me down into fog in cloudy weather.
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 13 May 2013 18: 39
            15
            will be finalized and will be knocked into the fog already in cloudy weather.

            Yeah, in the cloud I still believe in the fog .. there are big doubts.
            1. Dr. M2
              Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 15
              +2
              For your information, the presence of absorption in the visible range does not mean absorption at the wavelength of this laser at all. So at least it is "clear" or even "fog" - it can be one thing. Or, in your opinion, night vision devices in the dark cannot see you from a kilometer at a wavelength of 10 microns because it is "dark"?
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 13 May 2013 19: 38
                10
                No, of course, but I didn’t mean the absorption in the visible range. The laser does not have to be visible. But the dispersion of the energy of the beam from droplets of fog, dust, gas molecules, etc. no one has canceled. And the shorter the wavelength, the more energy you need to spend to cover long distances.
                1. Dr. M2
                  Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 49
                  15 th
                  In your opinion, scattering is somehow related to "overcoming distances"? And what is more, does "overcoming distances" by a beam of light require energy from it (the beam of light)? 0_o

                  if you want to say that light (I'm not talking about the visible range, but in general) is scattered on dust tens of micrometers in size or on drops (!!!) - you absolutely do not understand what you are talking about. And for some reason even visible light is not scattered on the "molecules". The sky is blue due to Mandelstam scattering on density fluctuations.
                  1. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 13 May 2013 19: 59
                    15
                    In your opinion, scattering is somehow related to "overcoming distances"?

                    In the atmosphere, yes. The greater the distance, the greater the scattering of the beam.
                    And what is more, does "overcoming distances" by a beam of light require energy from it (the beam of light)?

                    Not costs, but its dispersion. The intensity (read power) of the beam is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. To lasers, no matter how coherent and directional they are, this also applies.
                    And for some reason even visible light is not scattered on the "molecules".

                    True? Have you forgotten about the rainbow yet? Refraction in drops of water, and the light goes to all the necessary and unnecessary sides. And if the molecule is longer than the wavelength, it can also be absorbed by it with marvelous selectivity!
                    The sky is blue due to Mandelstam scattering on density fluctuations.

                    What, what?????? The sky is blue for a simpler reason. Red light is scattered the least, and violet the most. Here you have the blue sky.
                    1. Nick
                      Nick 14 May 2013 19: 10
                      0
                      Quote: Wedmak
                      Red light is scattered the least, and violet the most. Here you have the blue sky.

                      Exactly! And high-energy laser beams "gravitate" towards ultra-short X-rays, so the atmosphere is scattered and absorbed more intensively than low-energy long-wave IR rays. The problem is that the IR laser beam is much less scattered and absorbed by the atmosphere, but has a low energy. An X-ray laser produces a fairly dense beam of energy, but loses it at large distances due to the influence of the atmosphere.
                      Dialectics however ...
                2. xtur
                  xtur 14 May 2013 00: 10
                  +1
                  a laser is a coherent beam of light, and a coherent beam of radio waves is a maser
            2. tomket
              tomket 14 May 2013 00: 48
              -1
              But what if an aerosol cloud is created around the rocket?
              1. No_more
                No_more 14 May 2013 14: 36
                -1
                Yes, you can banally maneuver. I don’t think that this system is capable of inducing so quickly, but it needs a certain exposure time to hit the target.
      2. Stiletto
        Stiletto 13 May 2013 17: 49
        11
        Ahhh, ml.ya, there were still hooligans who blinded the pilots with laser pointers!
      3. SerAll
        SerAll 13 May 2013 18: 01
        +8
        You're not right! or behold quite right! power plant yes! BUT! there is such a thing as an external propagation medium (in which there will be applications of an EM wave laser)! permeability of the medium .. etc. and since There is a physics textbook for high schools.
        An electromagnetic wave (or a wave beam ... or ... each direction has its own terms) the physical principle of action (FPD) is the same!
        Ideal conditions were shown here (clear weather, warmth, humidity minimum, altitude minimum, the course is known ... and dr.
        In practice, the next cut of money!
        P.S. For comparison, in the USSR, not stupid people were sitting, everyone was doing it ... it didn’t work, and the source is not the point! Learn the works of Tesla!
        1. Joker
          Joker 13 May 2013 18: 27
          +4
          For comparison, in the USSR, not stupid people were sitting, everyone was doing it ... it didn’t work, and it’s not about the sources! Learn the works of Tesla!

          Well now lower your hands and sit? There were no computers in the USSR, but now there is, science does not stand still, perhaps current scientists will do what they could not before.
          1. rsnv
            rsnv 13 May 2013 19: 14
            10
            In the USSR were:
            a) powerful industry;
            b) Strong science;
            c) Excellent higher science and engineering education; d) The best high school in the world.
            What of this is the current RF?
            1. Vadivak
              Vadivak 13 May 2013 21: 41
              +7
              Quote: rsnv
              What of this is the current RF?


              The memory of great victories
            2. Wedmak
              Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 47
              0
              What of this is the current RF?

              The legacy of the USSR. All the good and bad that we got. It remains to get rid of the bad and develop the good.
              1. rsnv
                rsnv 13 May 2013 22: 09
                0
                I'm afraid there will be nothing to develop soon (
          2. a jacket
            a jacket 13 May 2013 19: 20
            +6
            Quote: Joker
            For comparison, in the USSR, not stupid people were sitting, everyone was doing it ... it didn’t work, and it’s not about the sources! Learn the works of Tesla!

            Well now lower your hands and sit? There were no computers in the USSR, but now there is, science does not stand still, perhaps current scientists will do what they could not before.

            Young man! How was it not? Were !! There were no personal ones. And supercomputers were in every department of the RAS. "Elbrus" have not heard? We, engineers, and ESok enough. And the rocket scientists, who calculated in real time all sorts of parameters of the rocket's movement in space and time, had dozens of computers. Their names depended on the design bureau, this computing tool that developed and supplied the MO. There was no shortage. Rather the opposite.
            1. Dr. M2
              Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 37
              -7
              And supercomputers were in every department of the RAS. "Elbrus" have not heard? We, engineers, and ESok enough. And the rocket scientists, who calculated in real time all sorts of parameters of the rocket's movement in space and time, had dozens of computers.


              Dear, for "calculating the parameters of the rocket's movement in space and time," that is, for mechanics according to Newton's equations, a microcalculator is enough. You do not understand at all what you are fence. And yes, poke your finger where there is now a supercompany in the RAS in each department. And most importantly - why.
              1. rsnv
                rsnv 13 May 2013 22: 13
                +2
                No need to poke your finger. It was said: "And there were supercomputers in every department of the Russian Academy of Sciences." There were once.
              2. Misantrop
                Misantrop 13 May 2013 23: 18
                +2
                Quote: Dr.M2
                to "calculate the parameters of the rocket movement in space and time", that is, for mechanics according to Newton's equations, a microcalculator is sufficient.

                And the smoke will not come from it, from that calculator? Especially considering that even the longitudinal bending of the rocket block was taken into account (a pipe through 4 compartments with lasers and a bunch of deviation sensors). This is apart from the fact that the location of the starting point is about 20 cm and time (with seven decimal places).
                There was even an analogue of the "mouse" on PURO to facilitate the input of information
                1. pensioner
                  pensioner 14 May 2013 13: 30
                  0
                  [quote = Misantrop] And the smoke will not come out of it, from that calculator? [/ q
                  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
            2. yak69
              yak69 13 May 2013 22: 59
              +1
              Quote: jacket
              supercomputers were in every branch of the RAS. "Elbrus" have not heard?

              I’ll tell you a story that one vice admiral told me.
              In the late 70s, the Americans sold us supercomputers for medical research under the Mir-2 program, on the condition that we, in the event of major discoveries, share technologies. The computers were mounted (the blocks themselves were walled up with their feet in a concrete floor) in one medical research institute and they were warned that they would check their availability once a month, on agreed dates. The Amers left. On the same evening, all the computers were dismantled and transported to another research institute. There they worked until the next check. The day before the inspections, they were brought back and again moored on the floor. Amers left, computers back. And so they worked for a long time.
              That's how we had to get hungry))) smile So what to do?)))
              1. Misantrop
                Misantrop 13 May 2013 23: 28
                +5
                In 1978, the SVVMIU had a rather powerful computer M-222, and a couple of years later they installed EES-1033. That's not counting a bunch of smaller specialized machines. For example, the "Panel-70" laboratory, fully simulating nuclear power plant nuclear submarine 670 project in all modes of its operation. Those. ALL valves worked in a single complex, ALL devices on ALL remotes of ALL battle stations. For Pentium-1, the processing speed and the amount of processed information is an overwhelming task (the processes in the reactor are rather complicated for calculation, apart from everything else). And this laboratory was not the only one at SVVMIU winked
          3. lelikas
            lelikas 13 May 2013 22: 41
            +9
            Quote: Joker
            There were no computers in the USSR,

            PK-01 Lviv, "Agat", "BK", "Corvette" - they look at you with bewilderment.
            1. pensioner
              pensioner 14 May 2013 06: 24
              -1
              Quote: lelikas
              PK-01 Lviv, "Agat", "BK", "Corvette" - they look at you with bewilderment.

              And cry to the heap.
            2. dddym
              dddym 14 May 2013 07: 41
              +2
              I look at the same with bewilderment - because I learned to program in mashcodes on a corvette, bk and dvk. Do you know how in those days the principles of Microsoft and iBeam were represented? "Imagine a hut, they put a tent on top without removing anything, then they put a garage on top of the tent, again they put a house without removing it." These firms, proclaiming the principle that old programs should work on a new computer and with a new operating system, have stalled in their development so much that, for example, the Corvette complex released in the country surpassed the Pentium1 in recalculation speed and graphics, which appeared on wide sale after this very "Corvette" was taken out of production. I remember the lightness and consistency of the BC architecture with 4 megabytes addressing (don't laugh at 4 megabytes, it was above the roof for a home computer Sinclair could hardly add 128 kilobytes to itself). Remember the game "elite" - who is older? So it was written for 48 kilobytes, included descriptions of dozens of ships, 9 galaxies with about 200 systems each with its own name, and a description of all kinds of minerals, political systems, tactical combat simulator, and much more. I'm talking about 1988. So there were computers in the USSR! And I also remember sinclairs - which, in the presence of 48kb, had sprite graphics and a pilot signal on the sides of the monitor itself, just like the bk - kapets! Neither draw anything worthwhile nor a point of your choice to draw, in contrast to bk and architecture - will shoot! Bq was dozens of times more interesting - but they closed it because perestroika broke out and Sinclair won ...
              1. Misantrop
                Misantrop 18 May 2013 16: 56
                0
                I have (still in working order and with the whole set) an even more ancient unit. The famous "Microsha" with 16 kb of all memory
          4. Misantrop
            Misantrop 13 May 2013 23: 13
            +6
            Quote: Joker
            There were no computers in the USSR

            BIUS "Omnibus" (torpedo weapon control system) made it possible to enter target data not only from the keyboard, but also with a special "pencil" directly on the monitor screen. This is a serial ship in 1986. wink
          5. fzr1000
            fzr1000 14 May 2013 08: 17
            +2
            In the USSR there were computers, for the needs of the military and Space enough.
      4. yak69
        yak69 13 May 2013 22: 47
        +3
        Quote: Atrix
        The problem with current lasers is the power plant. But in the future I think this will be solved,

        This is the main problem. Power plant. And it will not be possible to solve this problem soon.
        While all this is similar to SDI. There were also guns with nuclear pumping and other blah blah. In fact, the creation of an electrical installation capable of destroying many targets in a row at a great distance is the level of a revolutionary breakthrough in science as a whole. So far, sufficiently powerful lasers are available only in stationary laboratories and they consume sooo much.
        In order to create a mobile En.complex providing such power to such a Las.-gun, you need not a little more, curb the thermonuclear reaction, i.e. control YOU synthesis!
        Having solved such a problem in principle, scientists will solve the problem of energy supply for all of humanity - Controlled Thermonuclear Fusion and whoever solves this problem, in fact, will immediately become the master of the world!
        For some reason, it seems to me that the Higher Forces will not allow modern very bloodthirsty humanity to make such a discovery.
        Imagine that the Amers succeeded - the next day they will turn the whole world into slaves.
        The temptation of unlimited power is too great.
        This is my very amateurish opinion.
        1. CAMS
          CAMS 14 May 2013 00: 53
          +1
          I watched for a long time that before the collapse of the USSR, ours offered amers a test on our missile defense system, the point was that there was an installation that affected the missiles with some properties and the missiles fell apart in the air, it was a complex, but the amers refused, and with a hunchback we blindly went to the world, forgot the installation, but I hope that it exists
          1. yak69
            yak69 14 May 2013 13: 29
            0
            Quote: KAMS
            ours offered amers testing on our missile defense ......

            Quote: KAMS
            but hope she exists

            I watched as a scientific transmission, where one of our famous Academician, a designer of space technologies (I do not remember the name) said that back in Soviet times we created a compact source of impact on nuclear installations (whether it be a station or a reactor on a submarine) that can use wave radiation to disable the nuclear reactors from the spacecraft. And that the kinder surprise kiriyenko transferred this technology to the amers with the permission of the EBN. The scientist talked about a collective letter to the drunkard, but it was all in vain - the technology was "gone".
        2. es.d
          es.d 14 May 2013 01: 03
          +1
          Quote: yak69
          In fact, the creation of an electrical installation capable of destroying many targets in a row at a great distance is the level of a revolutionary breakthrough in science as a whole.

          Exactly! At the same time, will interest in the FINE fuss around oil disappear?
      5. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 14 May 2013 01: 07
        0
        Quote: Atrix
        Quote: fzr1000
        If not a fake, then .... "Kan play dangerous ... Americans."

        Of course not a fake)) The whole problem of current lasers is the power plant. But in the future, I think this will be solved, because the missiles also did not immediately become as precise and compact as they are now.


        And where did you get the idea that rockets have become compact? They just blei many-meter sausages and remained. Only at the very beginning of rocket science were there any significant advances. Then they built ur100 and Oka and then the sizes have not changed for 40 years ...

        Very similar to a fake. Pictures are different on the thermogram and on the usual recording. Maybe of course the scale is different ... Again, the application point is for some reason closer to the head, although it is more logical to hit the engine. Again, what kind of power source? Not a diesel engine ... In my opinion, we are being fooled ... they showed a trailer with a telescope, and the conclusions were drawn as if using a combat laser.
    2. Canep
      Canep 13 May 2013 17: 53
      +2
      I don’t think that fake, but I think that these weapons will not have a future until they have compact and very powerful sources of energy. Something like a car battery but with a capacity of about 10000 ampere hours. True, this source (or battery) will make a breakthrough in all areas of technology.
    3. Joker
      Joker 13 May 2013 18: 23
      +1
      Well, what kind of fake? Video from the official Lockheed Martin channel.
    4. APASUS
      APASUS 13 May 2013 19: 34
      +4
      Quote: fzr1000
      If not a fake, then .... "Kan play dangerous ... Americans."

      Watch the video again!
      On one part there is heating in the area of ​​the head part, and on the other in the area of ​​the propulsion system!
      But seriously, the absorption of energy by fog can reach 95% and such launches should be carried out in different climatic conditions
      1. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 50
        +2
        But seriously, the absorption of energy by fog can reach 95%

        can reach 100% I will tell you a secret. And maybe reach zero.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 04
          0
          And maybe reach zero.

          Is that so? What energy does the fog absorb with 0%? Radio waves?
          1. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 22
            0
            Yes, even radio waves. And you thought that the fog absorbs radio waves, say, a meter range?
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 13 May 2013 23: 31
              0
              And you thought that the fog absorbs radio waves, say, a meter range?

              Of course, it absorbs something, though I don’t remember which range. Otherwise, how would lightning fronts be displayed on radars?
    5. Reasonable, 2,3
      Reasonable, 2,3 13 May 2013 21: 01
      0
      This is not now, with us, on hypersound, everything is fine.
  2. Aristarch
    Aristarch 13 May 2013 17: 39
    +2
    Nevertheless, ray wars are still a very distant prospect. But technology is needed.
  3. svp67
    svp67 13 May 2013 17: 39
    +2
    2-km range, not much ... Well, now the UAVs and missiles will teach them how to perform maneuvers or "hide behind a cloud" ...
    1. TSOOBER
      TSOOBER 13 May 2013 18: 41
      +1
      add to all 14s of time in the visible part of the trajectory
      1. Joker
        Joker 13 May 2013 19: 32
        +2
        And if you increase the laser power and its range?
        1. ansimov
          ansimov 13 May 2013 20: 15
          +1
          Is it known how much one installation costs?
        2. SerAll
          SerAll 14 May 2013 00: 24
          +1
          ... And if you raise the humidity? The whole bunch will disperse and you won’t put it into focus ... you won’t put the lenses (phase shifters) in the sky as you don’t play power ... here, my friend, there are a lot of chips and the heads are not alone ... and you’ll turn out not simple heads .. .. to our generation, even having computers no software modeling complex can repeat mother nature!
      2. SlavaS
        SlavaS 13 May 2013 20: 51
        +2
        14s well, this is in slow motion, 4s rocket flight, 3s probably the laser work, the idea is somehow normal if 10 pieces at least work in a group, 0.3s for the target is obtained. Only if it rains or fogs, then from the entire system immediately for bespont.
  4. abc_alex
    abc_alex 13 May 2013 17: 42
    +6
    Well, it’s been proved once again that in a laboratory environment, a missile can be shot down with a laser. The only thing left is to create a working military model. :)
    1. Melchakov
      Melchakov 13 May 2013 17: 47
      +1
      Quote: abc_alex
      create a working military model.

      I, in the place of the Americans, would try to shove it somewhere where there is YaSu.
      1. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 38
        +1
        so they have 12 combat surface ships with a nuclear power plant, by the way.
  5. TS3sta3
    TS3sta3 13 May 2013 17: 45
    +2
    another video about american super weapons.
    1. SerAll
      SerAll 13 May 2013 18: 03
      +2
      Woah! just cut the dough ..
  6. black_eagle
    black_eagle 13 May 2013 17: 51
    +1
    So what? Well, now the rocket in the danger zone will fly in a cloud of smoke and the whole business, in the smoke the laser beam scatters only like that
  7. Sirocco
    Sirocco 13 May 2013 17: 51
    +5
    1. The topic of SOI is no longer relevant, we passed it. 2. From the cannon to the sparrows. 3. Even if we assume as possible, then it is worth talking about success when they learn to destroy not the rocket models of the Skillful hands circle, but real missiles, which have different flight speeds and a different distance. 4. Let us recall the "successful" fact of testing interceptor missiles from the United States, in the targets of which beacons were installed. I think that in combat conditions it will be difficult to drive a Fredliner to the enemy's launcher position, at a distance of 1.5 km, and aim at the missile laughing
  8. Nitup
    Nitup 13 May 2013 17: 53
    +2
    most importantly, the hulls and warheads of our ICBMs are protected against laser weapons. But here are the planes?
  9. dddym
    dddym 13 May 2013 17: 53
    +2
    if you come up with a coating that produces a lot of smoke when overheating? :)))) Yes, just kidding :)
    1. ansimov
      ansimov 13 May 2013 20: 18
      +3
      yes there is such a tree is called laughing
      1. Draz
        Draz 13 May 2013 20: 37
        +3
        Spare American scientists, wooden rockets are too much wassat
        1. dddym
          dddym 13 May 2013 21: 21
          +2
          Well, why ??? But how much can be done - the taiga is big :)))))
          1. ansimov
            ansimov 14 May 2013 16: 15
            0
            But what about the protection of nature ?? winked
  10. Konsmo
    Konsmo 13 May 2013 17: 53
    +2
    In total, we have more than 15 seconds of focusing on the target. In good weather, not the mirror surface of the target and other exotic (smoke, etc.) Perhaps this is only a competitor to the Jewish system to combat Aborigines.
    And what a good cut. There is a goal in 20 years to reduce the time of focusing on the target to 10 seconds.
  11. elmir15
    elmir15 13 May 2013 17: 53
    +4
    The second time the amers can’t get us down to expenses - ala star wars
    1. Ezhaak
      Ezhaak 13 May 2013 18: 21
      +1
      amers will not succeed in divorcing us for expenses

      So, after all, ours again took up a flying laser, and with a ground-based one, periodically infa slipped last year.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 13 May 2013 18: 24
        +9
        The main thing is that ours do not follow in the footsteps of amers. When they go their own mind, without looking back to the west, they get very good results.
        1. elmir15
          elmir15 13 May 2013 21: 35
          +3
          Quote: Wedmak
          The main thing is that ours do not follow in the footsteps of amers. When they go their own mind, without looking back to the west, they get very good results.

          I agree with you. Here, even an article was on this topic, that when we try to catch up and overtake in the end, it turns out badly, and when we go our own way without looking at foreign samples, unique good samples appear, which are largely ahead of foreign ones.
      2. elmir15
        elmir15 13 May 2013 21: 29
        +2
        Quote: Hedgehog
        So after all, ours again took up the flying laser

        I read somewhere that it’s easier to hit satellites with a low orbit from the air, so I probably made the right decision.
  12. Wedmak
    Wedmak 13 May 2013 17: 59
    +5
    Are guns cheaper? Or small air defense systems? Moreover, up to 4 km ... In the rain and in the fog .. give only guidance. Moreover, the target speed is up to 800 km / h. And here...
    Super straight ... 1.5 km, under ideal conditions, at a low speed target. And you need to accompany the target. And if she maneuvers? Or rotates around an axis (there is a natural cooling of the case)? Or is there a mirror surface under a paint layer? In general, these are still toys for adult uncles.
    Although yes, there are still advances, it's hard not to admit.
    1. Atrix
      Atrix 13 May 2013 18: 10
      0
      Quote: Wedmak
      Are guns cheaper? Or small air defense systems? Moreover, up to 4 km ... In the rain and in the fog .. give only guidance. Moreover, the target speed is up to 800 km / h. And here...
      Super straight ... 1.5 km, under ideal conditions, at a low speed target. And you need to accompany the target. And if she maneuvers? Or rotates around an axis (there is a natural cooling of the case)? Or is there a mirror surface under a paint layer? In general, these are still toys for adult uncles.
      Although yes, there are still advances, it's hard not to admit.

      Well, it’s kind of a system and is not supplied to the troops and is not accepted for service. This is just a prototype and all the flaws can be fixed in a couple of years. After all, the first missile defense had a bunch of flaws, but now it's not bad that I fly and shoot down winked
      These are all prospects for the future. 5-10 will be inferior to missile weapons for years to come, and what time will show next. But Russia now needs to develop these technologies, because in the USSR it was a leader in the development of laser systems.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 13 May 2013 18: 22
        +3
        This is just a prototype and all the flaws can be fixed in a couple of years.

        I agree, a prototype, even able to something. But you can’t argue against physics. A ray will dissipate in the atmosphere. The greater the energy, the greater the dispersion. As a result, we uselessly warm the air ...
        Although ... if you imagine for a minute what will happen on the battlefield, with the use of such lasers. belay The films show how great they burn everything, but somehow I did not think about a local increase in temperature from these very lasers and "accidental" fires in the event of a miss. There will be a fucking stove! With an airfryer!
      2. Joker
        Joker 13 May 2013 18: 30
        0
        The comments of the "patriots" are touching, but if ours did this, you would write in your pants with joy, when computers were placed in the whole room, and now they are hundreds of times smaller and more powerful, the same will happen with lasers, now it's bullshit, but in the prospect will be a formidable weapon, but we are leaving in the old fashioned way.
        1. Atrix
          Atrix 13 May 2013 18: 46
          -6
          Quote: Joker
          and we leave the old-fashioned hats.

          Why do we need expensive lasers when in Russia there are so many people and so many hats that they drop so that not one laser has time to bring down
        2. Wedmak
          Wedmak 13 May 2013 18: 46
          +4
          and now they are hundreds of times smaller and more powerful, it will be the same with lasers, now it’s bullshit, but in the future it will be a formidable weapon, and we will leave hats as usual.

          Yes, they have become smaller. But now microelectronics is approaching the physical threshold of miniaturization. Less, on the existing silicon base - nowhere.
          The lasers will have the same limitations. It can and will be powerful, but a couple more trucks with a nuclear installation and a generator will follow it. And optics has never been a highly stable system from shaking, dust, and other troubles in the form of nude-legged guerrillas with hammers (not hats, so stones ... shrapnel will work well) ...
          So far, the only sensible use of these lasers has been made recently - to cut ice in front of an icebreaker from high latitudes. Considering the nuclear installation on board and the short distances, it is quite feasible in the very near future.
          1. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 19
            +2
            You are deeply wrong. The problem is not "nowhere less" but in the removal of heat. Less is great. In silicon, electrons are heavy, so the de Broglie wavelength is small, the silicon transistor remains quite classical up to 1 nm, and now I will remind you ten times more. But on GaAs, the same is not the case there. So there the electrons are light. So, if you either reduce heat dissipation, or learn how to effectively remove it, for example, completely getting rid of kilometers of metal interconnects and moving to fully optical interfaces inside the processor, you can still reduce the size quite significantly.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 13 May 2013 19: 49
              +3
              [quote] You are deeply wrong. The problem is not "nowhere less" but in the removal of heat. [/ quote]
              Right Microcircuits are made using the lithography method (to explain what this is not necessary?). So, in experiments, if I am not mistaken, we got to the soft X-rays. But on an industrial scale, they still use light of a shorter wavelength - from the optical range. Everything would be fine, but the masks have become so small that the interference and diffraction of the waves are already affecting! That is, you need to switch to a shorter wavelength, and there are no reacting materials or they are unrealistically expensive.

              [quote] so that the de Broglie wavelength is small, the silicon transistor remains quite classic up to 1 nm [/ quote]
              Microcircuits are not made on pure silicon, it is pre-alloyed with boron or other additives, otherwise the transition cannot be formed!

              [quote] In silicon, electrons are heavy, [/ quote]
              [quote] Here on GaAs the same there everything is wrong. So there the electrons are light. / Quote]
              Come on?? Do electrons also have different weights ???? Maybe you confused with atoms?

              [quote] So, if you either reduce heat dissipation or learn how to efficiently remove it, for example, completely getting rid of kilometers of metal interconnects and moving to fully optical interfaces inside the processor, you can still reduce the size very significantly. [/ quote]
              If we move on to optical interfaces, then the processing should be optical! Otherwise, it will not cost a pound of raisins.
              1. Dr. M2
                Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 25
                0
                Right Microcircuits are made using the lithography method (to explain what this is not necessary?). So, in the experiments, if I am not mistaken, we got to the soft X-rays.


                didn't get there. cutting edge - extreme ultraviolet lithography, 13,6 nm.

                Microcircuits are not made on pure silicon, it is pre-alloyed with boron or other additives, otherwise the transition cannot be formed!

                additives are needed only to increase the concentration of charge carriers (electrons). besides how many of those additives? 10 in degree 17 for example on 1 cm in a cube? But the atoms of the main substance? 10 to the degree of 23? one impurity atom per million atoms of the basic substance? I assure you that this does not affect effective masses in any way.


                Come on?? Do electrons also have different weights ???? Maybe you confused with atoms?


                the effective mass of electrons is not only different at times for different semiconductors, but also depends on the direction of motion relative to the crystallographic orientation of the crystal, dear. Check out any semiconductor physics textbook. And yes, do not take it literally, otherwise there will be a brain rupture. And yes, "holes" are also heavy and light, right in the same crystal. And there are also spin-split ones. Ha ha ha.

                If we move on to optical interfaces, then the processing should be optical! Otherwise, it will not cost a pound of raisins.

                Who would argue. Why do you think all these cries about silicon nanostructures? A silicon laser is wanted at a wavelength of 1,55 microns.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 13 May 2013 20: 47
                  +1
                  didn't get there. cutting edge - extreme ultraviolet lithography, 13,6 nm.

                  Specifically for you specified - got. Soft X-rays with a wavelength of 0.4-5.0 nm are used. But ... very expensive.

                  additives are needed only to increase the concentration of charge carriers (electrons). besides how many of those additives? 10 in degree 17 for example on 1 cm in a cube? But the atoms of the main substance? 10 to the degree of 23? one impurity atom per million atoms of the basic substance? I assure you that this does not affect effective masses in any way.

                  No, additives are needed in order to cause a lack of electrons (holes) in one place, and in their excess. There are really few additives (for example, 6 kg of silicon near 2-4 gr boron), but this is very strongly affected.

                  electrons have not only different masses but also depend on the direction of motion relative to the crystallographic orientation of the crystal, dear. Take a look at any semiconductor physics textbook. And yes, do not take it literally, otherwise there will be a brain rupture.

                  Oh .... Moved to quantum mechanics? Only here you are confusing - the effective mass of the electron itself and the effective mass of the dynamic mass moving in a semiconductor. Here is the last and change in units of the rest mass of the electron. And then it is different for different semiconductors.
                  Well, if you started to argue, please express more clearly.
                  1. Dr. M2
                    Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 02
                    +1
                    Specifically for you specified - got. Soft X-rays with a wavelength of 0.4-5.0 nm are used. But ... very expensive.


                    I can give links about lithography of extreme ultraviolet to the sea. Give your link to the studio. Ha ha ha

                    No, additives are needed in order to cause a lack of electrons (holes) in one place, and in their excess. There are really few additives (for example, 6 kg of silicon near 2-4 gr boron), but this is very strongly affected.

                    well, "additives" in grams per kilogram is certainly strong. This is already a heavily doped semiconductor. With almost metallic conductivity. This is sometimes needed in some layers, for example, to create ohmic contacts, but as a rule, it has nothing to do with semiconductor devices and their operation. Of course it influences strongly. The intrinsic concentration of electrons in silicon is of the order of 10 to 13 degrees per cm cubed. So you increase the conductivity by orders of magnitude. But effective. the mass of electrons DOES NOT AFFECT IN ANY WAY. ALL. Calm down, it's a fact.

                    Oh .... Moved to quantum mechanics? Only here you are confusing - the effective mass of the electron itself and the effective mass of the dynamic mass moving in a semiconductor. Here is the last and change in units of the rest mass of the electron. And then it is different for different semiconductors.
                    Well, if you started to argue, please express more clearly.

                    Well, I won't argue about the "mass of dynamic mass". The rzhach struck me specifically. What if I reformulate the effect of the periodic field of the crystal lattice so that the Schrödinger equation remains the same as for free space, but I shove everything not into the (effective) mass, but into the charge? Will I leave the mass as it is? You attach too much importance to formalism, which is a mathematical abstraction, and you give it real meaning. What do you think I mean by talking about negative thermodynamic temperature when pumping a laser?
                    1. Wedmak
                      Wedmak 13 May 2013 23: 07
                      0
                      Can you find out what you graduated and who are you by profession?
                      1. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 17
                        0
                        no problem if you solve a simple puzzle at the level of 2-3 classes. Do you agree?
                      2. Wedmak
                        Wedmak 13 May 2013 23: 36
                        0
                        What kind of tasks? What kind of children's conditions?
                      3. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 37
                        0
                        my business to offer. if you agree, wire the consent.
          2. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 37
            0
            To date, the undisputed leader in the creation of lithographic EUV stepper
            is a Dutch company ASML. The stepper optics operate in a vacuum with long
            waves 13.5 nm. It is a set of Bragg mirrors consisting of
            alternating layers of Mo and Si coated with a thin protective layer of metallic Ru
            less than 2 nm thick. The interaction of photons with the internal surfaces of the stepper and
            a resist layer leads to the emission of a significant number of hydrocarbons, other
            compounds, as well as free radicals that are adsorbed on the surface
            mirrors. As a result of a series of chemical reactions stimulated by photons and
            by electrons, adsorbed molecules are transformed into a film, which
            increases the absorption of photons by the mirror. Due to the fact that the optical system of the stepper
            includes more than a dozen mirrors, pollution of each of them with a layer of less than 2 nm
            leads to a significant loss in the performance of the stepper. Reflectivity reduction
            the ability of a mirror depends on the surface concentration of absorbing atoms and on
            their absorption properties. Atomic hydrogen is used in the stepper as
            an effective method for cleaning carbon layers and certain oxides. Cleaning speed
            the contaminated portion of the mirror depends on the properties of the carbon film (type of bond,
            density, etc.).
          3. The comment was deleted.
        3. The comment was deleted.
      3. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 27
        +2
        And optics has never been a highly stable system from shaking, dust, and other troubles

        why do you think optics are needed for focusing? Maybe an electromagnetic lens will be for such games. And by the way, read about the Kumakhov lens for the X-ray range.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 13 May 2013 19: 52
          0
          And by the way, read about the Kumakhov lens for the X-ray range.

          Thank you, really interesting, did not know. But the focus lens clearly stands out in the photo. Maximum near infrared ... and most likely a regular red, solid state laser.
          1. Joker
            Joker 13 May 2013 20: 09
            +3
            Nice to read your discussion. good
          2. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 12
            0
            all high-power lasers are now fiber. solid-state (here I mean semiconductor) is simply impractical to make powerful.

            In a semiconductor laser, all generated power is released in an insignificant volume of the semiconductor structure, and in the case of a fiber laser it is evenly distributed along the length of the fiber. This solves many problems, such as the thermal effects inherent in conventional semiconductor laser structures: in particular, the heterogeneity of the distribution of heat generated over the emitting region (and the increase in intracavity losses due to non-radiative recombination), the increase in thermo-optical aberrations in the emitted light, and the so-called guidance in the crystal thermal lenses, and generally significantly increases the stability of the radiation parameters under fluctuations in the temperature of the medium (due to high-quality cooling of the resonator by virtue of orders of magnitude greater ratio of the area of ​​the resonator to its volume). Therefore, now fiber lasers are rapidly replacing lasers of old designs. We can say that laser engraving machines based on YAG: Nd (lamp-pumped) are the last generation of such systems, and fiber-pumped laser diodes are the most modern generation (in a sense, a fiber laser coherently sums up the light of laser pump diodes, with The efficiency of such a conversion into total coherent radiation is of the order of 80-90-and-more%, that is, it incorporates all their advantages, without having their drawbacks).


            Due to the fact that there is no heating of the emitting region (the power of the generated radiation is distributed over a long length), the fiber laser resource is an order of magnitude (or even two) higher than the resource of the semiconductor structure: about hundreds of thousands of hours versus about tens of thousands of hours, respectively (other things being equal), and this with a much greater “efficiency from the outlet”, and, accordingly, the absence of the need for forced cooling (in contrast to the radiating semiconductor structure).

            If a problem occurs with a semiconductor laser after operation at tens of thousands of hours, it is very likely that for this it will be necessary to send the entire system to the manufacturer (abroad?), Because it is unlikely that the Russian seller has all the components in stock in Russia or that they can quickly get. In the case of a fiber laser, all components (essentially fiber only) are very likely to be on the shelf of the seller.

            The radiation quality of fiber lasers, expressed in the parameters of the laser beam divergence, is much higher than that of semiconductor (e.g., YAG: Nd) lasers (for fiber, the radiation structure is close to one Gaussian mode). Accordingly, we have better quality of the boundaries of the figure, many times less instability of the area of ​​the evaporation spot and the uniformity of the distribution of the power density over it (that is, the depth of the heated layer, and accordingly the depth of the resulting engraving in one pass and in general). With regard to spot power uniformity, it should be noted that fiber lasers have significantly better temporal radiation coherence (in the ideal case of absolute temporal coherence, the amplitudes of radiation are added, and in the case of incoherence, they are intensities, so that the dependence of the power density and its uniformity in the evaporation spot on temporal coherence obvious and strong).

            It should also be noted that due to the natural (inherently fiber) delivery of radiation to the sample: the laser can occupy a convenient location for operation, even if it is located at a considerable distance from the processed sample.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 13 May 2013 20: 28
              +1
              all high-power lasers are now fiber. solid-state (here I mean semiconductor) is simply impractical to make powerful.

              I don’t know, I don’t know ... If I’m not mistaken in the military, they use either gas or solid-state ruby ​​and the like.
              But then, you seem to have just copied some article ... Well, well ... I will answer the same, but on a smaller scale.
              The advantages of fiber lasers traditionally include a significant ratio of the area of ​​the resonator to its volume, which ensures high-quality cooling, heat resistance of silicon and the small size of devices in similar classes of requirements for power and quality. The laser beam, as a rule, must be brought into an optical fiber for subsequent use in technology. For lasers of a different design, this requires special optical collimation systems and makes the devices sensitive to vibrations. In fiber lasers, radiation is generated directly in the fiber, and it has high optical quality. The disadvantages of this type of lasers are the risk of nonlinear effects due to the high radiation density in the fiber and the relatively small output energy in the pulse due to the small volume of active substance
              What kind of combat power can we talk about in this case ??? Yes, he will not heat the kettle in 50 !!!
              1. Dr. M2
                Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 38
                0
                The laser beam, as a rule, needs to be brought into an optical fiber for subsequent use in technology


                you don’t need to start anything anywhere. You haven’t realized what a fiber laser is.
              2. Dr. M2
                Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 39
                0
                The laser beam, as a rule, needs to be brought into an optical fiber for subsequent use in technology

                you don’t need to start anything anywhere. You haven’t realized what a fiber laser is.

                What kind of combat power can we talk about in this case ??? Yes, he will not heat the kettle in 50 !!!


                and how do you think laser cutting systems cut steel a centimeter thick with a fiber laser? Wake up.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 13 May 2013 20: 52
                  +1
                  and how do you think laser cutting systems cut steel a centimeter thick with a fiber laser? Wake up.

                  From a distance of less than 2 centimeters?
                  1. Dr. M2
                    Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 59
                    0
                    the distance is not much affected. You are all not thinking about that. There the rheinmetal cut the leaves of steel half a meter thick from a distance of a couple of kilometers. So what?
                  2. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 08
                    0
                    There the rheinmetal cut the leaves of steel half a meter thick from a distance of a couple of kilometers.

                    Metal? Half a meter ?? With 2 KM? Where???? Cut or burn a hole? And how much time and energy did it take?
                  3. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 13 May 2013 21: 15
                    0
                    Gazprom has laser devices for cutting off all that is superfluous from the heads of burning wells. Accordingly, at a distance.
                  4. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 25
                    +1
                    Right. MLTK-20, it seems like it is only on "combat" tests. BUT! I quote:
                    the MLTK-20 complex from a given distance of ~ 40 m demonstrated separation cutting of full-scale structures with wall thicknesses greater than 40 mm.

                    And with 50 I cut designs
                    total laser generation time was about 30 hours
                    .
                    Where is the rheinmetal?
                  5. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 13 May 2013 21: 33
                    0
                    Quote: Wedmak
                    Where is the rheinmetal?

                    Maybe they work from a powerful external power source? Gazprom devices are mobile by default. Although great.
                  6. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 41
                    0
                    Can. Even for sure. But you must admit, all the same, the characteristics of the devices are not at all combat.
                  7. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 13 May 2013 21: 47
                    +1
                    They will not be fighting for a very long time.

                    But the guidance system should pay a lot of attention.
            2. yak69
              yak69 13 May 2013 23: 51
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              Gazprom has laser devices for cutting off all that is superfluous

              Yes Yes! They, in Gazprom, have such devices for cutting off the "excess" .... dough from the profit !! laughing laughing
              Sorry, could not resist! laughing
              I just imagined how they "cut off the excess" and put them into home safes))) laughing
          3. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 06
            +1
            http://www.xakep.ru/post/59875/

            I admit lied.
            A 20 kW laser is capable of burning a 15 mm thick steel sheet at a distance of 900 meters, and a 30 kW mobile laser can burn planes and other objects moving at speeds up to 180 km / h.

            15 mm is not 500 mm, really. I repent. But I think they will succeed.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • DRUG DRUG
    DRUG DRUG 14 May 2013 05: 57
    0
    And the rocket should fall into the field of view of the laser beam. And if it flies over the treetops or in the folds of the mountains.
  • horoh
    horoh 13 May 2013 17: 59
    0
    No, not convinced, I can’t believe it either repeat
  • Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 13 May 2013 18: 05
    +3
    Another propaganda video in order to get a couple of billion more sad raccoons from the budget to "develop the topic" repeat
    1. kobussubok
      kobussubok 13 May 2013 20: 48
      +1
      But what about! Capitalism! Give more money for innovation! )))
      1. Landwarrior
        Landwarrior 14 May 2013 14: 03
        0
        Yes yes innovation wink
        1d17 Compression? no, have not heard laughing
  • orff
    orff 13 May 2013 18: 06
    +2
    Even in the Soviet army, they reacted coolly to laser weapons, because gunsmiths had seen battles in the seas and fields. Smoke, fog, rain, spray are the mortal enemies of every laser. Let Americans put themselves mega-lasers, Russian craftsmen will make a smoke screen and kapets to their billiard weapons.
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 21
      0
      Smoke, fog, rain, spray are the deadly enemies of every laser

      this is not true. once again: it all depends on the particular laser, for one the fog is a problem, for the other it is not, because water vapor has no absorption at its wavelength, well, it’s not even if it absorbs all the sunlight and it seems to you that there is nowhere more foggy.
      1. SerAll
        SerAll 14 May 2013 00: 42
        0
        Yes, where does the engagement? ... we are talking about different things! here is a completely different physical phenomenon! try to collect at such distances with a heterogeneous mature beam in a beam! do the trick! the output will be a flashlight with blurry focus!
  • Nikolko
    Nikolko 13 May 2013 18: 06
    0
    Hmm ... Does anyone know of the development of a combat laser, or are there any other answers to it?
  • erased
    erased 13 May 2013 18: 11
    0
    The fact that this board of laser technology will develop, and so I understand. But how much they manage to qualitatively cover our missiles is an even more important issue. There is something to think about.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 14 May 2013 02: 09
      +4
      Quote: erased
      The fact that this board of laser technology will develop, and so I understand. But how much they manage to qualitatively cover our missiles is an even more important issue.


      The polemic went into details and nuances, with insults and a claim to the truth in the last resort. The right is ugly!
      I would like to dwell on more general issues.
      1.Promising direction and, as you rightly noted, it will develop further. The base was prepared by the themes of Terra, Omega, Aydar, Skif-DM, Almaz, A-60 - Sokol-Echelon, Krona and others. As of 1982, we already had a combat system that shot down the RUM-4B radio-controlled target at D = 2 km . Further tests confirmed the stability of the result. This has been repeatedly demonstrated to the leadership of the country's air defense. In 1983, we had a combat gas-dynamic CO2 laser GDL RDO 600 with a power of 100 kW and dimensions of 2140X1820X680 mm.
      2. For effective laser operation transparent atmosphere needed or its complete absence. Therefore, clouds, dust, fog, and precipitation are practically absent from a height of 10-12 km. And in space, in general, ideal conditions for the passage of the beam. Therefore, the place of combat laser systems is reserved there. With further improvement - and on the battlefield, in air defense systems and so on. However, it will be more effective to use it from outer space against its targets located below (aircraft, aircraft, tactical ballistic missiles).
      3. In modern RKs such as Topol M, Yars, Mace already have constructive protection against radar, plus reduced time on the acceleration section, rotation of the case, thermal protection, etc.
      4. Problems.
      - Heat dissipation . So, 1 MJ of thermal energy is released at 4 MJ of power.
      - D action limited to the visible horizon. Therefore, as indicated in the Kama Sutra, the “top” position is preferred!
      - Power beam focusing difficulty. Amers focus their 192 solid-state optical fibers using a system of mirrors that scan at a frequency of 670 1 / s. You cannot do without an on-board computer.
      - compact high power source. Not the essence of the nuclear, on Skiff and on the A-60 there were 2 turbo-generators with a capacity of 2,1 MW. According to the statement of the Vice President of the Russian Academy of Sciences E. Velikhov, we managed to solve the problem of accumulating a large charge in relatively small volumes.
      - Weight characteristics installations will allow it to be placed on ships from 2 ranks and above.
      - Dependence on the transparency of the atmosphere. Previously, it was supposed to use a “tandem”: a ray of “enlightenment”, then a combat discharge. I seriously suspect that Crohn will be supplemented with a BLS, as the laser location system is already included in its composition. With an increase in the pulse power, it may well perform the task of burning the combat channel. Indirectly, this is confirmed by inf. about the construction of another complex near Nakhodka. Closes the DV direction.
  • Atlon
    Atlon 13 May 2013 18: 18
    +4
    A double-edged sword ... Even assuming that it makes sense (something lately has been too much about lasers ... Trying to get us into a new arms race?) That it will work, imagine a rocket (s) that are just will be guided by this beam to the installation! A flock flies, the laser has started ... The rocket has turned on a ray. The head can be protected from the laser (refractory material, mirror, etc.). And installing kirdyk. The rest of the rockets flew further ...
  • Toit
    Toit 13 May 2013 18: 25
    -1
    My stepfather served in the border guards on Lake Zaisan, told that they burned the Chinese with something like that.
    1. rsnv
      rsnv 13 May 2013 19: 18
      +2
      BM-21 Grad?
  • xzWhiteWolf
    xzWhiteWolf 13 May 2013 18: 51
    0
    Yes, let them put these on ships themselves .. Our modern missile systems, especially ship missiles, hit the target with dozens of missiles, and half fly so low that the laser can work on them vryatly. And even if he can, his rate of fire is just enough for 1 rocket. And since our missiles are smart and exchange data, after hitting a target, the remaining missiles take a new target ... Bottom line, they need 20-30 lasers on each ship, and so on ... And where do they have so much energy on them find?))) The laser is crude and so far only needed to study and improve the project.
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 23
      -1
      And even if he can, his rate of fire is just enough for 1 rocket

      what if the ship has one hundred of these "laser cannons"? business something. the emitter itself costs practically nothing. one of the advantages of technology.
      1. Old skeptic
        Old skeptic 13 May 2013 20: 46
        +1
        Yeah and twenty nuclear reactors. wink
  • individual
    individual 13 May 2013 18: 53
    +4
    Muddy video.
    In 1927, our classic A.N. Tolstoy wrote a fantasy masterpiece "The Hyperboloid of Engineer Garin".
    After the publication of the novel, scientists puzzled and puzzle over the consistency of the idea inherent in the plot of intrigue. In laboratory tests, in medicine, experimental optics, everything is OK. But in practice, it’s more expensive to implement a laser that works efficiently in the defense sector and the armament sphere.
    I suspect that this is another dummy, an idea-fix, a separate SDI. It is a false idea when the USSR succumbed to the provocation of Reagan political scientists with their initiatives and invested an immense amount of resources into dead-end developments, into nothing.
    A word to researchers, luminaries of science and applied physics, optics. We are waiting for what they will say.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 13 May 2013 19: 20
      +1
      In 1927, our classic A.N. Tolstoy wrote a fantasy masterpiece "The Hyperboloid of Engineer Garin".

      Perhaps the hyperboloid meant not a laser at all ... but some other kind of radiation. Fiction though.
      1. Aleks21
        Aleks21 13 May 2013 19: 43
        +1
        In his youth in Young Technique he read about radiation weapons from a converted kinescope. There gas is supplied in front of the cathode and a wide spectral beam burned everything at medium distances many times more efficient than lasers. The room was in the 80s.
        1. Dr. M2
          Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 52
          +1
          microwave non-lethal weapons have already developed
  • Pol
    Pol 13 May 2013 19: 19
    +2
    There is nothing fundamentally new. But the question is - what is it for? What will they shoot down? For example, an iskander flies just above the landscape + maneuvers, the last maneuver does not follow a standard path ... how can you focus on it? You can’t reach the ICBMs by distance or weather conditions ...
    Just an educational video ....
  • pasha1180
    pasha1180 13 May 2013 19: 19
    -2
    Lasers plan to put satellites in space for the destruction of nuclear weapons, there are no clouds, rain, or other factors that worsen the quality of the beam, if now the beam can reach the rocket by 1.5 km in the atmosphere, then in space, when it is destroyed, this distance increases several times, the protection of users suggest, a thicker rocket wall and a mirror are all unsubstantiated assumptions, the temperature in space is relative, at a flight height of 10–20 km of nuclear power bombs it’s about -56 C, the temperature of the copper vapor laser shown by the states is 1873 C Simple math 1873-56 = 1817. The melting point of steel is 1500 C, if you bring the laser to mind, the melting temperature can become higher, which in itself can provoke detonation of rocket fuel.
    1. Pol
      Pol 13 May 2013 19: 22
      +2
      As an asymmetric response - the elimination of the satellite constellation. This is how we again reach the "Star Wars".
    2. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 34
      -1
      in space, the temperature is relative, at a flight height of 10–20 km of nuclear bombs, it’s about -56 C, the temperature of the copper vapor laser shown by the states is 1873 C. Simple mathematics 1873-56 = 1817. Melting point of steel 1500 C

      Dear, your nonsense about what? What is arithmetic? You have some kind of strange arithmetic in your brain, frankly.

      PS On the topic - the temperature is determined by the energy of the radiation and the heat capacity of the object, as well as the processes of heat removal by radiation. And it can reach at least a million degrees in a matter of seconds, just let the energy down.
  • TNT
    TNT 13 May 2013 19: 24
    +1
    It is hard to believe, given the fact that the pin-up of the master on such things.
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 29
      0
      But how do you like it?
      http://pro-tank.ru/blog/974-the-germans-tested-the-high-energy-laser

      The German concern Rheinmetall, which is the largest manufacturer of military equipment and weapons in Germany and Europe, has tested a high-energy laser. Its distinctive features is that it consists of two modules, combining the rays of which allows you to track a small target, as well as destroy UAVs at a distance of several kilometers. 50 kW - such is the laser power, which consists of a gun for static tests of 20 kW and 30 kW - for static and dynamic tests, as well as a fire control system - Skyguard (below in the figure). Obviously, the laser power is less than the minimum value that is necessary for the battlefield (100 kW), but due to the simultaneous pointing of several rays at once, it is possible to achieve similar results with the necessary minimum.
  • Pol
    Pol 13 May 2013 19: 26
    +3
    It’s better to put on hypersound, but not on it bred ....
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 35
      0
      for me it’s necessary to work on this and that, but it’s more promising than this one.
  • Pol
    Pol 13 May 2013 19: 36
    +2
    Or, as an option, bring to mind the hydro-jet engines (Flurry torpedo) :-)
    How now can one resist a nuclear blank that moves at a speed of 500km / h under water? ..
    Also an asymmetric answer ......
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 40
      0
      How now can I resist a nuclear blank


      Do you have a "nuclear blank"? and what is this? 0_o
      1. Pol
        Pol 13 May 2013 19: 50
        0
        Did you find fault with the wording "nuclear blank"? This is a big word.
        Or are you asking about the Flurry? So it is with nuclear stuffing ....
        1. The comment was deleted.
  • Helizer
    Helizer 13 May 2013 19: 43
    0
    To burn a hole, the laser must shine continuously in one place. This possibility is eliminated by giving the projectile rotation.
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 53
      0
      ha ha ha brilliantly. therefore, if you drive a soldering iron in your backside in a circle with a diameter of 10 cm, then your skin will not suffer, because for heating the soldering iron must continuously heat one place?
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 13 May 2013 20: 01
        +3
        If the priest Chelicera (sorry) is able to remove more heat than the laser transmits to her, the skin will not suffer.
        1. Dr. M2
          Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 10
          0
          and where will the flying rocket take heat away?
          1. Helizer
            Helizer 13 May 2013 20: 32
            +1
            Are you familiar with the phrase "air cooling"?
          2. Wedmak
            Wedmak 13 May 2013 20: 54
            +1
            What prevents to make the shell of the rocket more heat-absorbing, and stabilizers more heat-conducting? Will work like an elephant’s ears.
  • FunkschNNX
    FunkschNNX 13 May 2013 19: 46
    +1
    it is enough for the rocket to rotate around its longitudinal axis and all the lasers will be poh.
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 19: 55
      -3
      absolutely not enough, on average, during more than a few revolutions, everything is absolutely the same. It is valid whether it rotates or not.
    2. Ogan
      Ogan 13 May 2013 20: 02
      +2
      There is a domestic patent, according to which the shell of a rocket that has a mirror coating rotates.
      1. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 07
        0
        the patent can and is. Remember how Rospatent, without batting an eye, issued a patent to a Russian citizen for a "program for a Windows Vista computer"? Microsoft did not even sue, because Russian patents, even in Russia itself, do not bear any legal consequences. But physics is another matter. Patents won't help matters here.
        1. Ogan
          Ogan 13 May 2013 22: 39
          0
          I personally knew the author of the patent; he is a doctor of technical sciences. Colonel, head of the design bureau. But there it seems, right now I don’t remember, it was about ICBMs.
          1. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 32
            0
            colonel? do not continue. in the sense of science, "colonel" is perceived as an "economist", namely, a synonym for "fool".
        2. bunta
          bunta 14 May 2013 00: 04
          +1
          Quote: Dr.M2
          Rospatent, without batting an eye, issued a patent to a Russian citizen for a "program for a Windows Vista computer"?

          Fake. Computer programs are not patented. They are subject to copyright equivalent to the creation of works of art.
  • uzer 13
    uzer 13 13 May 2013 20: 05
    0
    The element of laser weapons is space, and an integral attribute is a nuclear power plant, in the worst case, a one-time energy generator. And it has all been created and hangs above our heads. The dispersion of a laser beam in the atmosphere prevents the creation of an effective device with a large radius of action. lasers can be used in the Navy to protect against anti-ship missiles. In the future, it is possible to create ground-based combat laser systems. Most likely, they will include several laser systems that must be pointed at one point, only in this case it will be necessary to solve the problem of synchronizing these devices.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 13 May 2013 20: 15
      +1
      The element of laser weapons is space, and an integral attribute is a nuclear power plant, in a pinch, a disposable energy generator.

      Right.
      And all this has long been created and hangs above our heads.

      Not hanging. There were experiments, no more. Satellite nuclear power plants are now limited to radioisotope sources. And at their power, you don’t particularly shoot with a laser.
      Such lasers can be used in the Navy to protect against anti-ship missiles.

      It is unlikely to have time. Unless pulsed. But how many times have time to shoot? First you need a serious pump. One (maximum two) NR can quickly pump such a laser? Unknown
      1. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 21
        +1
        Right.


        wrong. read below, I made you estimates of orders of magnitude.
      2. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 22
        0
        right


        WRONG. Estimates of orders of magnitude I have given you below.

        And at their power, you don’t particularly shoot with a laser.

        their power and energy supply will be enough to laser for decades.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 58
          0
          their power and energy supply will be enough to laser for decades.

          Will not be enough. Their power is barely enough to send an intelligible radio signal from Jupiter to Earth (remember the Cassini spacecraft). And if you fly further ... The pioneers are still sending something, but only less than half of the equipment works there. (Actually, there probably isn't much to look at.)
          1. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 08
            0
            Will not be enough. Their power is barely enough to send an intelligible radio signal from Jupiter to Earth (remember the Cassini spacecraft).


            this is because radiated power spreads out over a sphere of enormous radius. and the Earth there on this imaginary sphere is an insignificant fraction of the total solid angle 4p. Everything is inversely proportional to the square of the distance shorter. The area of ​​the sphere is 4pr ^ 2. And in the case of a laser shot, everything is exactly the opposite. We shoot with a narrow directional beam.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 13 May 2013 22: 19
              0
              this is because radiated power spreads out over a sphere of enormous radius

              s .. in the realm yes ... but nothing that the radio signal is also directional ?!
              Everything is inversely proportional to the square of the distance shorter.

              Not all, but the beam power drops so.
              Sphere area 4пр ^ 2

              True? And where does the area of ​​the sphere?
              And in the case of a laser shot, everything is exactly the opposite. We shoot with a narrow directional beam.

              Whatever the beam is narrow and directional, it EVERYTHING diverges! Shoot the laser at the moon - you will have a beam diameter of 5 mm, and there is already 3 km!
              1. Dr. M2
                Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 36
                +1
                s .. in the realm yes ... but nothing that the radio signal is also directional ?!

                Do you even understand what kind of directions should be discussed? what fractions of angular seconds? So even if directed, it somewhat weakens my statement, but it is still orders of magnitude far from your ideas.

                the area of ​​the sphere, while the power flux density is inversely proportional to the area.

                The laser of course diverges. But at distances of several kilometers, this can be neglected to defeat a rocket. There are hundreds of thousands of kilometers to the moon.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 13 May 2013 22: 57
                  0
                  Do you even understand what directions should be discussed? what fractions of angular seconds?

                  Of course I understand. Accuracy can go up to a few fractions of a second of arc. However, the signal is directional, which allows it to reach the destination in a form acceptable for its recognition.
                  the area of ​​the sphere, while the power flux density is inversely proportional to the area.

                  It is not the area of ​​the sphere that is considered, but the area over which the flow extends i.e. in the case of an EM signal, a circle.
                  But at distances of several kilometers, this can be neglected to defeat a rocket.

                  In a vacuum, yes. In the atmosphere - no longer. Other hindrances come into play.
                  1. Dr. M2
                    Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 28
                    0
                    Of course I understand. Accuracy can go up to a few fractions of a second of arc. However, the signal is directional, which allows it to reach the destination in a form acceptable for its recognition.

                    recognition is possible not due to directivity, but due to the monstrous sensitivity of the receivers. Are you aware of any sensitivities there? Imagine that you lit a match in Vladivostok. How much light can you see in Moscow from her? So this is by the standards of space communications as much as fuck.

                    It is not the area of ​​the sphere that is considered, but the area over which the flow extends i.e. in the case of an EM signal, a circle.


                    I don’t know about you, maybe you live in two-dimensional space and consider circles, and smart people consider a sphere for a spherical wave front, a cylinder for a cylindrical one, but in any case it is a second-order surface, as a surface in three-dimensional space should be. Hence the inverse proportion to the square of the distance, not the distance.
                    1. Wedmak
                      Wedmak 13 May 2013 23: 33
                      0
                      and smart people consider a sphere for a spherical wavefront, a cylinder for a cylindrical

                      That's right, the flow released from one point and will go as an expanding cone, but in the cross section (signal scattering area) it will be a circle.
                      1. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 35
                        0
                        who has a circle and a cone, and who has a spherical and spherical segments, and in the case of an isotropic point source - a sphere and a ball. The radius is clearly not the same as the radius of your circle.
                      2. Wedmak
                        Wedmak 13 May 2013 23: 41
                        0
                        and in the case of an isotropic point source, a sphere and a ball. The radius is clearly not the same as the radius of your circle.

                        And who was talking about a point source? The conversation was about directional.
                      3. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 47
                        0
                        do you think that focus and punctuality are mutually exclusive concepts? I thought it was warm and soft.
                      4. Wedmak
                        Wedmak 13 May 2013 23: 52
                        0
                        Why? Spot can be both omnidirectional and narrowly targeted. It was about the second.
                      5. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 58
                        +1
                        In your opinion, if the source is well directed (even suppose this), then you need to take the area of ​​the circle and not the segment of the sphere stretched over it to find the power flux density from it at a large distance? 0_o do not disgrace.
                      6. Wedmak
                        Wedmak 14 May 2013 00: 04
                        0
                        Ah, here you are. I'm stupid for the night already. Yes you are right, a segment of the sphere.
                      7. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 14 May 2013 00: 08
                        0
                        Well, to mutual satisfaction we came to an agreement :-) Have a good night.
                      8. Wedmak
                        Wedmak 14 May 2013 00: 14
                        0
                        Thanks. )) Well debated ... wink
  • Dr. M2
    Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 19
    0
    and an integral attribute is a nuclear power plant, in a pinch, a disposable energy generator


    Where did it come from, I wonder? everyone here is shouting about it. no one thinks that a stun gun "needs a 220 V socket" to defeat? because the discharge is negligible in time, and the power is actually tiny. but effective. so here. and in general, even if you are.

    power in continuous (!!!) mode - 100 kW. burn for an hour. Roughly speaking, excluding losses of 100 kW * hours. 1 kWh only 3,6 MJ. That is, for an hour of operation with a 100 kW beam, only 360 MJ is needed. Well, let’s take into account the losses of 400. We put the heat of combustion of gasoline 40 MJ / liter, for the convenience of counting.
    Wake up, arithmometers, I do not need a nuclear power plant, I only need 10 liters of gasoline. The energy of an ordinary car.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 02
      0
      Yeah. Chezh then save every watt of energy on spacecraft? But there stands YU designed to work in 4-6 years! And the power of these units is not 100 kW. God grant 10 kW scratched. Moreover, the power of the source decreases with time. So ... judging by your calculations, you live in some other reality.
      1. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 06
        0
        Dear,

        1. and here generally spacecraft.
        2. where is the voyager? already outside the heliosphere? How many decades has its installation been working and will it still work? clearly not 4 or 6.
        3. if you calculate energy in watts, then there’s nothing to talk about.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 13 May 2013 22: 24
          0
          1. and here generally spacecraft.

          Well, you are going to shoot a laser in space for years ....
          where is the voyager? already outside the heliosphere? How many decades has its installation been working and will it still work? explicitly not 4 or 6.

          Maybe beyond, or maybe only crosses - it's not clear. The planned term of work has come out, but the energy from three RTGs (by the way, they are in plutonium) comes in (not everyone else knew about nuclear materials then). Roughly enough until the 2025 year.
          if you calculate energy in watts, then there’s nothing to talk about.

          Indeed, energy is expressed in joules. Whose I am ... Probably incorrectly put it, like you above.
  • waisson
    waisson 13 May 2013 20: 27
    0
    there are no weapons like tokavos; there are prototypes; prototypes; you all well know how the samples differ from actual combat units that have been adopted; sometimes it takes years before they will be adopted. as far as I hear 3 more Reichs were engaged in these developments
  • EDA2000
    EDA2000 13 May 2013 20: 30
    +1
    Fake? whether or not it did not matter, a very limited scope and only in good weather, they will fight according to the forecasts of the weather center probably with the same efficiency
  • Concept1
    Concept1 13 May 2013 20: 43
    +1
    Everything is normal with us, just a little information!


    А-60 / 1А2 / ROC "Sokol-Echelon" / complex 1LK222
    Work on the flying laboratory “1А2” on the improvement and modification of the special complex and its systems continues to the present. The chief designer - Deputy General Designer of the TANTK on this topic is N.A. Stepanov.

    Moreover, according to an unnamed source in the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, work on the A-60 theme among the few Russian military promising projects receive full funding from the state armaments program.
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 20: 47
      -1
      the topic is closed in the USSR.
  • 120352
    120352 13 May 2013 21: 10
    0
    A good mallet, but something else recently, all the media shouted that such a weapon would require a couple of Dneproges at once for one shot, and they had something like a field kitchen on the trailer.
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 21: 13
      +1
      Where did it come from, I wonder? everyone here is shouting about it. no one thinks that a stun gun "needs a 220 V socket" to defeat? because the discharge is negligible in time, and the power is actually tiny. but effective. so here. and in general, even if you are.

      power in continuous (!!!) mode - 100 kW. burn for an hour. Roughly speaking, excluding losses of 100 kW * hours. 1 kWh only 3,6 MJ. That is, for an hour of operation with a 100 kW beam, only 360 MJ is needed. Well, let’s take into account the losses of 400. We put the heat of combustion of gasoline 40 MJ / liter, for the convenience of counting.
      Wake up, arithmometers, I do not need a nuclear power plant, I only need 10 liters of gasoline. The energy of an ordinary car.

      When a conventional radar from the same C-300 consumes 100-150 kW, nobody shouts that nuclear reactors are needed. Ugh.
    2. Wedmak
      Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 15
      0
      They simply did not show the power plant. She is in another truck. And behind it is a convoy of trucks with fuel for a generator. And most likely it is enough for one shot in a couple of hours.
      1. Dr. M2
        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 21: 17
        0
        Where did it come from, I wonder? everyone here is shouting about it. no one thinks that a stun gun "needs a 220 V socket" to defeat? because the discharge is negligible in time, and the power is actually tiny. but effective. so here. and in general, even if you are.

        power in continuous (!!!) mode - 100 kW. burn for an hour. Roughly speaking, excluding losses of 100 kW * hours. 1 kWh only 3,6 MJ. That is, for an hour of operation with a 100 kW beam, only 360 MJ is needed. Well, let’s take into account the losses of 400. We put the heat of combustion of gasoline 40 MJ / liter, for the convenience of counting.
        Wake up, arithmometers, I do not need a nuclear power plant, I only need 10 liters of gasoline. The energy of an ordinary car.

        When a conventional radar from the same C-300 consumes 100-150 kW, nobody shouts that nuclear reactors are needed. Ugh.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 13 May 2013 21: 36
          +1
          When a conventional radar from the same C-300 consumes 100-150 kW, nobody shouts that nuclear reactors are needed. Ugh.

          You do not compare the ground-based complex with the constant supply of fuel for a diesel generator and spacecraft, where you can’t make either fuel or replace batteries.
          The most powerful nuclear reactor in space, had a thermal power of 150 kW. This is on 11 kg of uranium 235. But already there was electric power about 6 kW. And it was a calculation for the 1 year. Not enough, right?
          Where did you get 100 kW per hour for the laser, and even on 10 liters of gasoline, I can’t imagine ...
          1. Dr. M2
            Dr. M2 13 May 2013 21: 48
            -2
            Where did you get 100 kW per hour for the laser, and even on 10 liters of gasoline, I can’t imagine ...

            and they would eat mind in high school physics lessons, would understand ...
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 13 May 2013 22: 14
              +1
              Oh .. insults go?
              Yes, I taught physics well in high school. Even at the university they dragged us well ...
              Maybe in 10 liters of gasoline, and 100 kW of energy ... chemical will fit. Only you have forgotten one thing - energy conversion. In electricity, it will be a maximum of 1 kW / h if you burn this gasoline in a gasoline generator. A dozen light bulbs ...
              Not even a laser pump is talking. Although maybe in a couple of days you will gain enough energy for a shot. One.
              That is, for an hour of operation with an 100 kW beam, only 360 MJ is needed.

              360 MJ ... an example of such energy? The energy released during the explosion of 1 tons of trinitrotoluene (TNT equivalent): 4,184 MJ.
              Those. you want to say that in 10 liters of gasoline hides a little less than a ton of TNT ?????
              And the heat of combustion of gasoline by the way 34 MJ / liter... And your "put 40" is 44 MJ / kg.
              1. Dr. M2
                Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 20
                -2
                Dear, you are clearly not in yourself.

                Let's start simple. 10 liters of gasoline contains a colossal amount of energy. This is about 8 kg of mass, and then use the formula m * c ^ 2 to count yourself. But we are talking about the energy that will be released during the combustion of this very gasoline. For the sake of simplicity, I have indicated a calorific value of 40 MJ / liter. This is more than 10 kilowatt-hours (energy is calculated in kilowatt-hours, not kilowatts, kilowatts is power, that is, the time derivative of energy). So "... it will be a maximum of 1 kW / h" is a wild rzhach. The person who talks about the energy in "kW divided by an hour" still argues that he knows physics. So 10 liters. 40 MJ each. 400 MJ. This is 111 kWh. Loss of 10%. Yes, at least 60, not the point. The remaining power of 50 kW is more than enough. Now. If we accumulate this energy in a supercapacitor, say, and shoot pulses, say one millisecond, and save 1 second, then the power from the laser will not be 50 kW, but all 50 MW.

                The energy released during the explosion of 1 ton of trinitrotoluene (trotyl equivalent): 4,184 MJ.
                Those. you want to say that in 10 liters of gasoline hides a little less than a ton of TNT ?????
                And the heat of combustion of gasoline by the way is 34 MJ / liter. And your "put 40" is 44 MJ / kg.

                Dear, think with your brains. A liter of gas is not a kilogram. This is approximately 800 grams. So I saw on the wiki like you the number 44 and reduced, well, not by 20%, but by 10, for convenience. I’m here evaluating orders of magnitude. Why are you poking me 10%. Gasoline is different. The spread from grade to grade is the same 10%. Are you aware that your height is about 1 meter? But 1,5, or 2, or 7,5 meters is not the point.

                Now about the TNT explosion. Here, a characteristic value of the order of 1 kcal / gram. That is 4,2 kJ / gram. Or 4,2 MJ / kg. In a ton - 1000 kg. Wipe your eyes and make no mistake more than three orders of magnitude.

                Z.Y. What kind of university? Academy of international trade of Zazhopino?
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 13 May 2013 22: 32
                  0
                  Quote: Dr.M2
                  For losses of 10%

                  And what engines do you know with such efficiency?
                  1. Dr. M2
                    Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 37
                    0
                    And what engines do you know with such efficiency?


                    any electric motor has an efficiency of about 90-95%, in any trolleybus that travel past you every day. But where does the engine in general?
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 13 May 2013 22: 42
                      0
                      The electric motor does not work on gasoline
                      1. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 45
                        -1
                        what's the difference. Well, take an efficiency of not 90% but 50, and calm down. I estimate orders of magnitude, not percentages. Well, not 10 liters of gasoline, but 20. Does it change something if I have a 1000 liter tank there for several days of continuous operation or for several months of real combat work in an intense mode when something constantly flies and needs to be shot down?
                      2. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 13 May 2013 22: 55
                        0
                        Big difference. Because not 90%, but not more than 25%. But this is only the beginning of energy loss, is not it? You will lose on the mechanics when transferring energy to the generator, you will lose about 50% on the generator. Further, losses on conductors, a huge share of energy will be taken away by auxiliary systems.
                        Well, how much gas will it take?
                      3. Dr. M2
                        Dr. M2 13 May 2013 23: 26
                        0
                        no more than 20 liters per hour of continuous operation and power of 50 kW.
                      4. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 13 May 2013 23: 58
                        0
                        Are there such people?
          2. Wedmak
            Wedmak 13 May 2013 22: 45
            0
            Well, yes, not in yourself .. from your calculations.
            This is approximately 8 kg of mass, and then according to the formula m * c ^ 2 yourself count.

            Energy of rest. Which does not mean that we can distinguish it from there.
            The remaining power of 50 kW is more than enough.

            So, we have left 50kW of 360 ... Interesting.
            If we save this energy in the ionistor, say, and shoot with pulses, say one millisecond, and save 1 second, then the laser power will not be 50 kW, but all 50 MW.

            That is, you increase the energy by 3 orders of magnitude, "concentrating" it with a laser, moreover, the charge is 1 sec.? Either I'm shod in skis, or you live in another universe.
            Why, then, are giant companies making giant energy generators for pumping up a hefty laser, when fired which ... a solar bunny appears on the shell of a rocket and .. with great difficulty, after ten seconds, burns 2 mm steel.
            And you are here with 50 kW, a mediocre such hydroelectric power station did.

            Ionistor
            Disadvantages
            The specific energy of symmetric ionistors is less than that of batteries (5 – 12 W · h / kg at 200 W · h / kg for lithium-ion batteries).
            Voltage depends on the degree of charge.
            Possibility of burnout of internal contacts during short circuit.
            Low operating voltage (several volts).
            Significantly greater self-discharge compared to batteries: of the order of 1 μA for the 2 f × 2,5 B

            Mde .... much you accumulate it there ...
            1. Dr. M2
              Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 54
              0
              So, we have left 50kW of 360 ... Interesting.


              That you have left 50 kW of 360 MJ. It’s probably interesting not to have brains and compare apples with oranges?

              That is, you increase the energy by 3 orders of magnitude, "concentrating" it with a laser, moreover, the charge is 1 sec.? Either I'm shod in skis, or you live in another universe.

              I increase power by 3 orders of magnitude, firing in a millisecond what I saved for a second. Do you even know what monstrous power densities modern lasers can create in pulses of a few nanosecond or even femtosecond durations?

              Why, then, are giant companies making giant energy generators for pumping up a hefty laser, when fired which ... a solar bunny appears on the shell

              it is you who live in another universe. Your nonsense without comment.

              And you are here with 50 kW, a mediocre such hydroelectric power station did.

              an average hydropower plant is hundreds of megawatts, not 50 kilowatts. Cum already mistaken for 4 orders.

              Mde .... much you accumulate it there ...

              an impulse is more than enough. Yes, I didn’t offer precisely ionistors. It’s just for an example that it is fashionable to accumulate energy and shoot with more power than the accumulation power. For nanosecond pulse modes, no ionistors are required; any laser engraving system spars tens of watts of power, calculated as a continuous mode, with pulses of tens of nanoseconds at a frequency of dozens of kilohertz and costs a penny, a million or two.
    3. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 04
      0
      The most powerful nuclear reactor in space, had a thermal power of 150 kW. This is on 11 kg of uranium 235. But already there was electric power about 6 kW. And it was a calculation for the 1 year. Not enough, right?


      rare nonsense
  • Svarog
    Svarog 13 May 2013 21: 19
    +1
    Have you taken this so seriously? :) The missile was launched on the easiest to shoot down, accelerating trajectory, the rest has already been described (weather, humidity, etc.). But the most important thing is that the simplest missile, which is now owned by Palestinians and similar countries, went astray. The installation is built as a cheap option for shooting down self-made or simple missiles. Most likely this is the niche that is, indeed, the most successful for lasers. You do not have to build interceptor missiles, which are many times more expensive than an attacking simple missile.
    Protection from such a laser is most likely not complicated. But the laser will continue to have a variable wave, which will complicate the protection devices on such simple missiles. Moreover, such a system is likely to be easily detected, respectively, again against the natives who will not be able to answer.
    I am sure that in addition to less energy absorption (reflectors), it is enough to "dress" the rocket in ceramics, and it will become inaccessible to the laser - the energy / efficiency costs will decrease significantly.
  • sxn278619
    sxn278619 13 May 2013 21: 31
    0
    so after all everything was said in SOI. We do not rotate the rocket strongly and that’s it. Those. need to burn the stove.
  • fatty
    fatty 13 May 2013 21: 40
    0
    Yes, Academician Arkady Georgievich Shipunov passed away, blessed memory, but still alive academician Gryazev Vvsily Petrovich. And I also saw the Great Sergei Pavlovich the Invincible at the Victory Parade, and his Iskander. .so here is the UNBEATABLE SERGEY PAVLOVICH this year-90!
  • crambol
    crambol 13 May 2013 21: 52
    0
    Quote: Dr.M2
    The sky is blue due to Mandelstam scattering on density fluctuations.

    Oh?
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 21: 54
      0
      http://my-tribune.blogspot.ru/2010/07/blog-post.html

      A century ago, Leonid Mandelstam realized that Rayleigh's theory is too beautiful to explain the color of the sky. The fact is that theoretical results diverged from observations: Rayleigh scattering should be suppressed by interference. Researchers have come to the conclusion that a critical point is the optical heterogeneity of the medium.

      In short, we are far from all physicists here, so I’ll try to formulate on fingers: the color of the sky is determined by the typical dimensions of the inhomogeneities that arise in the atmosphere. Molecules move constantly in the air, which leads to the formation of regions (for a short time) with increased and decreased pressure relative to the environment. And our atmosphere has such characteristics that the dimensions of these inhomogeneities are such and such. And it is precisely these typical sizes that determine the ranges of waves that will dissipate better or worse. In such a simple way the color of the sky is set.

      Z.Y. I hope it is clear that pressure and density are related? At least remember the equation of state of an ideal gas? So pressure fluctuations = density fluctuations.

      Z.Y. For more serious people here:

      http://ufn.ru/ufn09/ufn09_3/Russian/r093c.pdf
  • fatty
    fatty 13 May 2013 22: 03
    0
    and on the staff’s laser weapons, piss and forget, as the immortal Vasil Ivanovich said.
  • Thunderstorm
    Thunderstorm 13 May 2013 22: 39
    0
    "Scorcher"
    http://www.popmech.ru/article/8352-vyizhigatel/
    1. Dr. M2
      Dr. M2 13 May 2013 22: 42
      0
      Let's be honest, this is trash from a museum in the suburbs. the topic was closed back in the USSR. And not a "burner", but a "dazzler". Agree, a little different. From your link: Contrary to popular belief, "Squeeze" does not fall under the UN Protocol prohibiting the use of blinding weapons, as it is designed to destroy optoelectronic systems, not personnel. The use of weapons for which blinding people is a possible side effect is not prohibited.
    2. tracer
      tracer 14 May 2013 02: 50
      0
      Donkey-Pitel is. Not more than. Designed to blind the enemy observing the columns in optical devices. And we closed the topic "then". When "Burana" could fly.
  • Boot under the carpet
    Boot under the carpet 13 May 2013 22: 51
    -1
    Something bullshit footage. IMHO, many more years will pass until this is brought to mind. In the meantime, they will bring it to mind, they will come up with a cheap and angry means of scattering the beam of this laser, say, when some sensor in the rocket head is triggered by critical heating.
  • lewerlin53rus
    lewerlin53rus 14 May 2013 00: 01
    +3
    No wonder. We have men already use laser weapons in domestic fights laughing
  • Konsmo
    Konsmo 14 May 2013 01: 35
    +1
    hi I remembered. They cut metal on the late "Red Proletarian". The laser cut parts up to 6-7 mm steel. Well, the principle is the same as for this Amer machine, only the distances are different. As it was, we had an urgent order and the laser cutting stopped, the optics were flying , well, in short, everyone is shocked by the hair on the p ... tearing, we are from the fact that the order is overdue, and the owners are tortured to change the optics. And it costs about .. you can. In short, we transfer the order to the plant near Moscow. In a month or two we ask the guys from Kyr Pyr how they solved the problem. It turned out that in order to save money, in the workshop where the laser complex was located, they began to turn off the heating at night.
    And that's it, the optics from the temperature difference cracked, maybe the Dew effect has still affected (moisture condensate)
    I mean, what if this system was tested at temperatures of 0 and below. Or only in Texas at the test site. wassat
  • tracer
    tracer 14 May 2013 02: 44
    -1
    "-Vidik..Shmidik -?" "-Compact parabolic !!!!!" Gold words . In my opinion, laser weapons today, in terms of their level of development, are nothing more than an experimental device in a physics lesson in the 8th grade of the Soviet school. I read somewhere that all the fantastic laser projects plus the Electromagnetic Gun are stuck into one. Namely .... lack of compact and super-powerful sources of electric energy. The topic has been well developed by conscientious scientists ... And the shelves are laid for this very reason. There is simply no alternative to high-speed missile systems. The laser needs a few seconds (time) to pierce the hole, but if the rocket rushes even above sound speed (not talking about hyper speed) .. what kind of lasers are there ..))) From a kilometer ... aha ... No one even blinks will have time.
  • DRUG DRUG
    DRUG DRUG 14 May 2013 05: 32
    0
    The Russian guys will make a plasma cloud around the rocket similar to the Shkval rocket-torpedo, and no laser will take it. In addition, the speed of movement will increase due to a decrease in the resistance of the medium.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 14 May 2013 06: 51
      0
      Well, the Flurry around is still not a plasma, but a gas bubble. And the speed grows due to different densities of the medium in which the torpedo moves. But it seems like experiments with plasma are being conducted, but something about successes is not heard.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • lewerlin53rus
    lewerlin53rus 14 May 2013 07: 52
    0
    My little one can do that too fellow
    [media = http: //vk.com/video97900874_164748531]
  • runway
    runway 14 May 2013 09: 33
    0
    From the fact that we have doubts that this technique will be promising, nothing will change. The caravan, as they say, continues to go .... I do not think that the Americans are so stupid as to spend billions out of their pockets on unpromising equipment. Their decision-making system simply will not allow this. We were skeptical of the tests being conducted in the USA on their use of hypersonic weapons .... But if we recall the development of firearms, then in ten years lasers (masers) will probably be quite familiar.
    As for the video attached to the article, it is very difficult to determine the type of product used. But the fact that the product acted on the rocket CONTINUOUSLY until it was destroyed suggests that many of the current problems of using lasers (masers) and their designers have already been solved. Therefore, citing calculations from available publicly available sources, we do not understand the essence of the event.
  • Vtel
    Vtel 14 May 2013 09: 48
    0
    for a certain time, the laser beam concentrates on the head of the rocket and “leads” it for some time

    I propose to remove a small part of the exhaust gases from the head fairing to create a kind of cloud around the rocket or to protect the head part with titanium plates, they’ll warm them if they can.
  • Dinver
    Dinver 14 May 2013 10: 24
    0
    At the expense of the power plant, I read an article about our Soviet developments in this field, the laser can be powered not only from electricity, but also with the help of a chemical reaction, something like chemical cartridges one cartridge one beam lasting 1-3 seconds, so it’s quite possible that Americans will take this path, if we develop this topic, then laser rifles and pistols are not far away.