Military Review

Star Wars Ideas

165

US Navy creates weapon on new physical principles


It would seem that the US Navy today has a sufficient set of means of protection against cruise and ballistic anti-ship missiles (RCC). However, some military experts doubt that these defenses will be able to withstand the new generation of winged and ballistic missiles, being developed in a number of countries, primarily in China.

Volley on a million


The September report of the research service of the US Congress is devoted to the analysis of works in the field of creating weapons on new physical principles. This report clearly shows the concern of military experts that in a number of combat scenarios with the massive attacks of surface ships by various means of air attack, the existing ammunition of traditional defenses may, firstly, not be enough, and secondly, the cost of the naval anti-aircraft missiles ) this ammunition is simply incomparable with the cost of attacking weapons.

It is known that the US Navy missile cruisers have ammunition of 122 missiles, and destroyers - of 90 – 96 missiles. However, a part of the total number of missile weapons is accounted for by Tomahawk cruise missiles for strikes against ground targets and anti-submarine weapons. The remaining amount is the missiles which can be up to several dozen units. It should be borne in mind: to increase the probability of hitting an air target, two missiles can be launched on it, which increases the rate of ammunition consumption. In the universal vertical launchers of the ship, missiles of various types are installed together, and therefore the reloading of the UVPU is possible only when returning to the base or in the parking lot.

If we analyze the cost of specific samples of naval missiles of the US Navy, then the defense of a surface ship requires a lot of money. Thus, the price of one unit of anti-aircraft missile weapons for some types exceeds several million dollars. For example, to protect a ship from aircraft (LA) and cruise anti-ship missiles in the near zone, there are used RAM (Rolling Airframe Missile) missiles, costing 0,9 million dollars per unit of treasury, and ESSM (Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile) missiles for 1,1 – 1,5 million. For protection in the middle zone from aircraft and cruise anti-ship missiles, as well as from ballistic anti-ship missiles, the SM-6 Block 1 missile system worth 3,9 million dollars is used at the final trajectory segment. Standard SM-3 Block 1B (14 million dollars per unit) and Standard SM-3 Block IIA missiles (more than 20 million) are used to intercept attacking ballistic anti-ship missiles on the middle extra-atmospheric trajectory segment.

To increase the effectiveness of the means of defense of US Navy surface ships, they are currently working in the field of laser weapons, electromagnetic guns, and hypervelocity projectile. The availability of such means will allow counteracting both airborne and surface attack weapons.

Power of light


The work of the Navy in the development of high-power military lasers reached a level that allows you to counteract certain types of surface (SC) and air targets (CC) at a distance of about 1,6 kilometers and begin their deployment on warships (BC) after a few years. More powerful ship-borne lasers, which will be ready for deployment in subsequent years, will give the US Navy BC aerial the ability to counter the SC and CC at distances of about 16 kilometers. These lasers can, in addition to performing other tasks, provide anti-missile defense for BC at the final line against certain types of ballistic missiles, including the new Chinese anti-ship ballistic missile ASBM.

Star Wars Ideas


The US Navy and the US Department of Defense today are developing three types of lasers that can in principle be used on a BC: a solid-state SSL (solid state laser) fiber laser, an SSL slit laser, and a free electron lasers (FEL) electron laser. One of the experienced SSL fiber laser demonstrators developed by the Navy using the LaWS (Laser Weapon System) laser weapons program. Another option is a fiber optic SSL laser laser created using the Tactical Laser System (TLS) system. Among a number of US Department of Defense programs to develop an SSL slit laser for military purposes is the Maritime Laser Demonstration Marine Laser Demonstration Program.

The Navy also created a low-power FEL free-electron laser prototype and is currently working on a prototype of this higher power laser.

The report stresses that although the Navy is developing laser technologies and prototypes of potential ship-borne lasers, and also has a generalized vision of the prospects for their further development, at present there is no specific program for purchasing serial versions of these lasers or a certain program that specifies the specific laser installation times. on certain types of BC.

As noted in the report, laser weapons have both certain advantages and a number of shortcomings in countering various types of threats, including ballistic missiles.

Laser - arguments for


Among the advantages of laser weapons - cost. The cost of ship fuel for generating the electric power needed for an electrically pumped laser shot is less than one dollar per shot, while the cost of one short-range missile defense system is 0,9 – 1,4 million dollars, and long-range missile defense is several million dollars. The use of lasers can give BC an alternative when destroying less important UAV-type targets, while missiles will be used to ensure the destruction of more important targets. The BC is a very expensive type of naval technology, while against it the enemy uses relatively cheap military equipment, small boats, UAVs, anti-ship missiles, ballistic anti-ship missiles. Therefore, due to the use of lasers, you can change the ratio of the cost of defense of the ship. BK has a limited ammunition of missile and artillery weapons, the expenditure of which will require the temporary withdrawal of the ship from the battlefield to replenish the ammunition. Laser weapons have no restrictions on the number of shots and can be used to destroy false targets that are actively used to expend ship ammunition. A promising ship with laser and rocket weapons will be more compact and less expensive than a URO ship with a large number of missiles in vertical launchers.

Laser weapons will provide almost instant defeat of the target, which eliminates the need to calculate the trajectory of interception of an attacking target with an antimissile. The target is damaged by focusing the laser beam on it for a few seconds, after which the laser can be refocused on another object. This is especially important when the BC is operating in the coastal zone, when it can be fired at with rocket, artillery and mortar weapons from relatively short distances.

Laser weapons can hit super-manoeuvrable targets, surpassing ship-based missiles in their aerodynamic characteristics.

The laser provides minimal side damage, especially when conducting combat in the port area. In addition to the functions of hitting targets, a laser can be used to detect and track targets, and to influence them non-lethally, ensuring the suppression of airborne opto-electronic sensors.

Laser flaws


Among them, the implementation of interception only within the line of sight of the target and the impossibility of the destruction of over-horizon targets. Limiting the possibility of intercepting small objects with strong agitation, which hides them in the crests of the waves.

The intensity of laser radiation passing through the atmosphere is attenuated due to absorption in spectral lines of various atmospheric components or due to Rayleigh scattering, as well as macroscopic inhomogeneities associated with atmospheric turbulence or heating of the atmosphere by the beam itself. As a result of scattering on such inhomogeneities, the laser beam can expand, which will lead to a decrease in the energy density, the most important parameter characterizing the damaging ability of a laser weapon.

When repelling a massive attack of a single laser on a ship, it may not be enough due to the need to repeatedly redirect it in a limited period of time. In this regard, it will be necessary to place several lasers on the battlefield of the type of anti-aircraft artillery systems (ZAK) of self-defense on the last line.

Low-power lasers of a kilowatt level can be less effective than more powerful megawatt-level lasers when acting on protected targets (ablative coating, highly reflective surfaces, body rotation, etc.). Increasing the laser power will increase its cost and weight. The impact of a laser beam in the event of a miss can lead to undesirable collateral damage and damage to its aircraft or satellites.

Size matters


Nevertheless, the potential targets for a laser weapon may be optical-electronic sensors, including those used on anti-ship missiles; small boats and boats; unguided rockets, projectiles, mines, UAVs, manned aircraft, anti-ship missiles, ballistic missiles, including ballistic missiles.

Lasers with an output power of about 10 kilowatts can counteract the UAVs at near ranges, tens of kilowatts - BLA and some types of boats, hundred kilowatts - BLA, boats, NUR, projectiles and mines, hundreds of kilowatts - all the goals listed above, as well as manned aircraft and certain types of guided missiles, with a capacity of several megawatts - for all the previously mentioned targets, including supersonic anti-ship missiles and ballistic missiles at ranges up to 18 kilometers.

GCs with lasers with power over 300 kilowatts can protect not only themselves, but also other ships in their area of ​​responsibility when they are, for example, in a carrier-based strike group.

According to the US Navy, cruisers with Aidzhis missile defense system and destroyers (ships of the CG-47 and DDG-51 types), as well as airborne helicopter dock ships (FCDs) of the San Antonio type LPD-17 have an adequate level of power supply for combat using laser weapons such as LaWS.

Some US Navy ships will be able to use SSL-type lasers with power output up to 100 kilowatts in combat.

So far, the Navy does not have a BC with sufficient power supply or cooling capabilities to ensure the operation of SSL lasers with an output power exceeding 100 kilowatts. Due to the large size of FEL lasers, they cannot be placed on existing cruisers or destroyers. Dimensions of aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships (LHA / LHD type) with a large flight deck can provide sufficient space to accommodate a FEL type laser, but they do not have sufficient power supply to operate a megawatt FEL type laser.

Based on these conditions, the Navy in the coming years will have to determine the requirements for the designs of promising BCs and the limitations imposed on them in the case of installing shipborne lasers, in particular SSL lasers with a power over 100 kilowatts, as well as FEL lasers.

These restrictions led, for example, to the completion of the CG (X) cruiser program, since this project provided for the operation of an SSL laser with a power over 100 kilowatts and / or a FEL megawatt-type laser.

After the completion of the CG (X) program, the Navy did not announce any long-term plans for acquiring BCs capable of operating an SSL-type laser with a power over 100 kilowatts or an FEL laser.

Laser bearers


However, as emphasized in the report, options for ship designs that can expand the capabilities of the Navy to install lasers on them in the coming years may include the following options.

Designing a new version of the destroyer DDG-51 Flight III, which the Navy plans to purchase in the 2016 fiscal year, with sufficient space, power supply and refrigeration capabilities to support SSL laser power 200 – 300 kilowatts or more. This will require the extension of the DDG-51 case, as well as provision of space for the placement of laser equipment and additional electric generators and refrigeration units.

Designing and purchasing a new destroyer, which is a further development of the DDG-51 Flight III variant, which will ensure the operation of the SSL laser with an output power of 200 – 300 kilowatts or more and / or the operation of a megawatt FEL laser.

Modification of the UDC design, which will be purchased in the coming years so that it is possible to ensure the operation of the SSL laser with a power of 200 – 300 kilowatts and more and / or a megowatt FEL laser class.

Modification, if necessary, of the design of a new aircraft carrier of the Ford type (CVN-78) so that the SSL laser can be operated with a power of 200 – 300 kilowatts and more and / or a megawatt FEL laser.

In April, the NNS 2013 announced that they were planning to install a laser weapon at the USS Ponce UDC, which was converted from an amphibious assault ship to an experimental one for technological development of a laser weapon against attacking boats and UAVs. In August last year, the 30 kilowatt laser was installed on this ship, which is located in the Persian Gulf. According to the statement of the Central Command of the US Armed Forces, the test laser successfully destroyed the high-speed boat and UAVs.

As part of the program to create naval laser weapons, the Navy initiated a project of technological refinement of the SSL-TM solid-state laser (solid-state technology maturation), under which industrial groups led by BAe Systems (BAE Systems), Northrop Grumman (Northrop Grumman) ) and Raytheon compete for the development of a ship's 100 – 150 kilowatt laser, effective against small boats and a UAV.

The US Navy R & D Department will conduct a thorough analysis of the results of testing the laser at UDC Pons for further use in the SSL-TM program, the purpose of which is to create a prototype laser with a power of 100 – 150 kilowatts for marine testing up to 2018. Interception rules and technology of LaWS use in combat conditions will be determined, which are then supposed to be implemented in more powerful samples of laser weapons.

Further increasing the laser power to 200 – 300 kilowatts will allow these weapons to counteract certain types of cruise anti-ship missiles, and increasing the output power up to several hundred kilowatts and up to one megawatt or higher can make this weapon effective against all types of cruise ships and ballistic anti-ship missiles.

But even if the developed weapon based on solid-state lasers has sufficient power to destroy small-sized boats, boats and UAVs, but cannot counteract the winged or ballistic anti-ship missiles, their appearance on ships will increase their combat effectiveness. Laser weapons will, for example, reduce the use of missiles to intercept UAVs and increase the number of missiles that can be used to counter anti-ship missiles.

Force of induction


In addition to solid-state Navy lasers from 2005, an electromagnetic gun is developed, the idea of ​​which is that a voltage from a power source is applied to two parallel (or coaxial) current-carrying rail buses. When the circuit is closed, by placing on the tires, for example, a moving cart, conducting current and having good contact with the tires, an electric current arises that induces a magnetic field. This field creates pressure, which tends to push the conductors that form the circuit. But since the massive rails-tires are fixed, the only moving element is the carriage, which under the action of pressure begins to move along the rails so that the volume occupied by the magnetic field increases, that is, away from the power source. Improving the EM guns is aimed at increasing the final speed to the numbers M = 5,9 – 7,4 at sea level.

Initially, the Navy began developing EM guns as a weapon of direct coastal support to the marines during amphibious operations, but then reoriented this program to create EM weapons to protect against RPC. Currently, the Navy is funding the work of BA Systems and General Atomics to create two EM-weapons demonstrators, whose evaluation began in 2012. These two prototypes are designed for throwing projectiles with energy 20 – 32 MJ, which ensures the flight of a projectile over a range of 90 – 185 kilometers.

In April, the 2014 Navy announced plans to install an EM-gun prototype in the 2016 fiscal year aboard the Spiehead high-speed multi-purpose high-speed amphibious assault ship-catamaran JHSV (Joint High Speed ​​Vessel) for marine testing. In January, 2015 became aware of the plans of the Navy to adopt the EM gun during the 2020 – 2025 period. In April, it was reported that the fleet was considering the possibility of installing an EM gun on a new Zumvolt-type destroyer (Zumwalt, DDG-1000) in the middle of the 2020-s.

At the end of 2014, the command of the naval systems of the US Navy Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) accidentally published a request for RFI (Request for Information) information on the program to create a powerful rail EM gun. The request was published on behalf of the Directorate of Directed Energy Weapons Programs and NAVSEA Electric Fighting Equipment (PMS 405), the US Navy ONR (Office of Naval Research) R & D Directorate and the Office of the Secretary of Defense. He appeared on the FedBizOpps 22 government website on December 2014, and was canceled four hours later. Anyone who has had time to become familiar with RFI can get an idea about the directions of development of the rail EM gun program. In particular, industry and academic institutions were invited to submit their proposals for the development of an FC-gun (fire-control sensor) EM-gun control system sensor for detecting, tracking and attacking ground and air targets and ballistic missiles.

According to RF, the FCS sensor of a future rail EM-gun should have an angle of view of electronic scanning of more than 90 degrees (in azimuth and in a vertical plane), track a target with a small effective scattering surface (EPR) at long range, track and hit ballistic targets in the atmosphere, block environmental disturbances (weather, terrain and biological), provide data processing for repelling a ballistic missile strike, providing air defense and hitting surface targets, while alive attack targets and launched supersonic missiles, to conduct a qualitative assessment of battle damage. In addition, the FCS sensor must demonstrate rapid closure of the fire control loop, increased resistance to technical and tactical countermeasures, high speed tracking and data collection, as well as technology readiness sufficient to create a prototype in the third quarter of the 2018 fiscal year and ensure readiness in 2020 – 2025.

RFI had an appeal to industrial companies and research institutes to describe the key elements and the degree of readiness of their FCS technologies, provide information on their suitability for multi-purpose applications, possible problems of integration with existing naval combat systems and the impact on the logistics chain.

The NAVSEA surface war research center in Dahlgren (Virginia) was supposed to accept industry proposals during the 21 – 22 period of January 2015 and give the final answer to the 6 February. But now, naturally, all these dates are shifted to the right.

The US Navy R & D Department has initiated an innovative program for creating an experimental model of an EM rail cannon in 2005. The first stage of the program envisaged the creation of a launcher with an acceptable lifespan and reliable pulse power technology. The main work was focused on the creation of the barrel of the gun, a source of energy, rail technology. In December, the 2010-th demonstration system, developed by SIC in Dahlgren, reached a world record in terms of muzzle energy, which was 33 MJ and sufficient to launch a projectile a distance 204 kilometers.

The first EM-gun demonstrator built by an industrial company belongs to BAE Systems and has the power of 32 MJ. This demonstrator was taken to Dahlgren in January 2012 of the year, and a few months later a competing prototype of General Atomiks arrived there.

Based on the achievements of the first phase of work in 2012, the second phase was initiated, during which work focused on the development of equipment and methods that ensured the rate of fire at the level of 10 shots per minute. To ensure constant rate of fire, it is necessary to develop and implement the most effective methods for thermoregulating the EM gun.

The first tests of the prototype EM guns developed by BAE Systems or General Atomics at sea will take place aboard the JHSV-3 Millinocket (Millinocket) multi-purpose high-speed amphibious assault ship-catamaran. They are scheduled for the 2016 fiscal year and provide for single-shot shooting. Firing in semi-automatic mode using a fully integrated shipboard EM gun is scheduled for 2018 year.

Hyper Speed ​​Projectiles


The development of an EM gun also includes the creation of special hyperthread projectile (HVP) (hypervelocity projectile), which could also be used as standard 127-mm ship-projectile and 155-mm land guns. The US Navy cruisers, and there are 22 units of them, have two, and the destroyers (69 units) have one 127-mm gun. Three new Zumvolt-type DDG-1000 destroyers in construction each have two 155-mm guns.

According to BAE Systems, the HVP projectile has a length of 609 millimeters and a mass of 12,7 kilograms, including a payload of 6,8 kilograms. The mass of the entire set to run HVP - 18,1 kilogram with a length of 660 millimeters. The BAE Systems specialists say that the maximum rate of HVP shells is 20 rounds per minute from the Mk45 127 caliber of millimeters and 10 rounds per minute from the advanced 155-mm gun of the destroyer DDG 1000, which is designated as AGS (advanced test system). The rate of firing of the EM gun - six rounds per minute.

The firing range of HVP 127-mm Mk 45 Mod 2 cannons exceeds the 74 kilometer, and when firing 155-mm DDG-1000 destroyer guns - 130 kilometers. In the case of firing these projectiles from the EM gun, the firing range will be more than 185 kilometers.

The request from the Navy to provide RFI information to the industry in July 2015 for the manufacture of a prototype EM gun indicated the mass of the HVP launch kit within 22 kilograms.

When launched from an artillery 127-mm cannon, a projectile reaches a speed corresponding to the number M = 3, which is two times less than when fired from an EM-gun, but more than twice the speed of a conventional 127-mm projectile launched from a ship-gun Mk 45. According to experts, this speed is quite enough to intercept at least some types of cruise anti-ship missiles.

An advantage of the concept of using a 127 mm HVP gun and shell is the fact that such guns are already installed on cruisers and destroyers of the US Navy, which creates the prerequisites for the rapid spread of new shells on navy as the development of HVP is completed and this weapon is integrated into the combat systems of ships of the above types.

By analogy with ship-borne laser weapons, even if hyperspeed shells launched from 127-mm artillery guns are unable to counteract the ballistic missile, they will nevertheless improve the combat effectiveness of the ship. The presence of these projectiles will allow a smaller number of missiles to be used to counter the cruise missile, while increasing the number of missiles to intercept ballistic missiles.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/27401
165 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. VadimL
    VadimL 10 October 2015 07: 11 New
    +6
    Not sure about the effectiveness of such systems. In my opinion, it is more reasonable to spend "extra" energy on the operation of powerful electronic warfare equipment.
    1. Skif83
      Skif83 10 October 2015 07: 29 New
      +18
      Yes, let them spend ...!
      The main thing is that they spend, but they still print, because their printing press, but sooner or later this system will collapse.
      It is only necessary to push her more often.
      The fact is that in reality the USSR did not lose the rivalry race, etc.
      He was handed over by Gorbachev with the hangers-on.
      In the early 80s, the situation was such that the Americans could collapse. Star Wars, etc. they were very strained.

      But the seniors at the helm of the USSR did not conceive the situation, or imagined themselves omnipotent ...?
      It was necessary to push the U.S. to the abyss, and they would collapse, with a much greater crash (which, however, remains to be done)!
      So don’t worry about the Zpartners, "let them spend on half-crazy ideas, the more the better. They would have to throw a throw in about" promising "unearthly technologies ...
      1. VadimL
        VadimL 10 October 2015 07: 47 New
        +6
        In this case, I do not consider this issue from the point of view of "We" - "They." I doubt the very theoretical idea of ​​using lasers as air defense / missile defense systems on ships. This concept itself is quite controversial.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 10 October 2015 08: 06 New
          +17
          Quote: VadimL
          I doubt the very theoretical idea of ​​using lasers as air defense / missile defense systems on ships.

          This is a matter of time. A couple of months before the first flight of the Wright brothers, an article on the impossibility of flying vehicles heavier than air was published in a reputable scientific journal signed by a reputable authority, with theoretical assumptions and corresponding calculations. Probably the brothers did not read it. And if they did, they didn’t understand a belmez.
          And thank God! hi
          1. kocclissi
            kocclissi 10 October 2015 13: 03 New
            +8
            Demand creates supply, or if, on a simple basis, for each duplex, there is a pin with a screw! They will do something like this:
          2. Sterlya
            Sterlya 10 October 2015 20: 47 New
            +3
            they need to offer the idea of ​​creating a more expensive thing.
            For example annihilators winked . Well, sooooo expensive, but also effective. Very. fellow
            1. LEX SU
              LEX SU 11 October 2015 06: 54 New
              +3
              Give them the drawings of the Death Star of 1979.
              Personally from Darth Vader.
              Let them build!
              laughing
        2. BMW
          BMW 10 October 2015 08: 33 New
          +4
          Quote: VadimL
          This concept itself is quite controversial.

          It is not controversial, but harmful.
          Compare the cost of all the equipment of the laser system and only a three-fold increase in the cost of classical means of attack, of which two directors of interference and one means of destruction.
          Laser weapons in the atmosphere have no prospects, at least in the foreseeable future.
          Also, just messing up about the cost of one impulse of one dollar. A modern power plant consumes fuel in tons per hour, and this is just zilch with what is needed for an aircraft, i.e. we are talking about tens of tons per hour. wassat
        3. Azitral
          Azitral 10 October 2015 09: 03 New
          +4
          Why? As the main one - no, but a good addition for some conditions. We must not brush it off, but examine it ourselves and find asymmetric answers.
          1. BMW
            BMW 10 October 2015 10: 26 New
            +5
            Quote: Azitral
            We must not brush it off, but examine it ourselves and find asymmetric answers.

            On the subject of LO, it is necessary to conduct R&D and no more so as not to lag behind in scientific and design terms and no more, moreover, in this area a breakthrough is possible in areas that we did not even think about. As they say - everything is possible. In addition, it is an excellent weapon for outer space, and no one can say where rivalry will shoot. And its use in the fleet is a chisey cut dough and nothing more.
            In the cycle "Shock Force" was a transmission about missile defense. It said that in the USSR the interception of ballistic targets by missiles was recognized as ineffective and unpromising. Developments were carried out in creating a plasma field in the upper atmosphere, about which these goals were destroyed, burned down or lost working capacity. Successful trials were conducted to defeat a ballistic target. They faced the problem of the lifetime of such a field. The ball shows a machine based on the Ural, a former of a plasma field, though in a stowed position. But with the collapse of the USSR, these works were stopped. It is interesting now that this topic is being developed or not.
            I’m talking about plasma. If success is achieved on this topic, then plasma can be used to protect ships. And it will be more effective than LO.
            Something like that. hi
            1. gladcu2
              gladcu2 10 October 2015 13: 49 New
              +2
              BMW

              at the expense of the fiery field, you bent the excess. Well this is how much energy you need to spend to create this business even on a small scale.

              And frankly, one dollar per shot with a laser gun, this author also says something wrong.

              This take one liter of diesel for one bucks and burn it. And then imagine how to use this energy to heat up the rocket casing to incapacitate it in hundredths of a second.
              1. BMW
                BMW 10 October 2015 16: 14 New
                +1
                Quote: gladcu2
                Well this is how much energy you need to spend

                Cold plasma on planes has already been used, there have been experiments. I am not a physicist, but if you dig a network, I think you will find, of course, in general terms, secrecy, however.
                1. BMW
                  BMW 10 October 2015 16: 32 New
                  0
                  Quote: bmw
                  Cold plasma on planes has already been used, there have been experiments.

                  Issues only get along. crying
            2. Chak
              Chak 10 October 2015 23: 15 New
              +1
              I agree on the research and development of lasers - you can’t leave behind. I have not heard about plasma, thanks for the information, I have to look! Lasers have a weak point - a drop in efficiency in opaque / slightly transparent environments. Therefore, at present the laser is a super-efficient weapon ... in space opera novels.
          2. CAMS
            CAMS 10 October 2015 16: 45 New
            +1
            Rummage through the internet, our developments have been and are underway, only the requirements for the use of our military are much higher. Therefore, we are silent.
        4. tot843
          tot843 17 October 2015 21: 56 New
          0
          This is in vain. The idea will be realized in principle after some time if a fundamentally new source of energy is found. Nikola Tesla found this source, only early left life.
      2. Zoldat_A
        Zoldat_A 10 October 2015 08: 26 New
        +10
        Quote: Skif83
        The fact is that in reality the USSR did not lose the rivalry race, etc.
        He was handed over by Gorbachev with the hangers-on.
        In the early 80s, the situation was such that the Americans could collapse. Star Wars, etc. they were very strained.

        And I, for example, always said that, firstly, the Cold War did not end, it just went into a phase of calm, and now a new round begins. And secondly - the fact that the Americans slapped the “For Victory in the Cold War” medals does not mean that they won it. And even awarding Humpbacked with her is not an indicator. Hitler over there also stamped the medals "For the Capture of Moscow" ... Well, where is that Hitler? ...

        American politicians and the military believe that they can spend money in lards - and there won't be a damn thing - everything will go as it goes. But financiers do not think so. Especially those who print dollars. They know K.Marx by heart, a handbook. They only do exactly the opposite according to Marx (otherwise - at least, socialism will take over their own heads). And therefore, they know that the struggle for the stability of the dollar within the United States can only be flooded with them the rest of the world. EVEN in the absence of competition to the dollar, it is impossible for them to fill the world indefinitely. The world is not rubber. On Mars if only to take them out ... laughing Sooner or later, the dollar bubble will burst with a big crash and sprinkle least of all those who are farthest from the dollar. A big crack will definitely, because America is used to tackling as many “coalitioners” as possible into solving its problems. You look at their hump and enter paradise yourself easier ...
        1. Nikolay K
          Nikolay K 10 October 2015 10: 04 New
          0
          Do you propose while the states developing EM guns and combat lasers just sit and wait for the American bubble to burst?
        2. gladcu2
          gladcu2 10 October 2015 13: 55 New
          +1
          Zoldata

          Just don’t think that the dollar will collapse and there will be a complete buzz in the world.

          The fact that you have an epiphany is a special case.
          In fact, this dollar has “collapsed” since the 50s of the USSR. As you can see, these hopes were enough for 3 generations. (generation is 25 years old).

          So without lazar guns can not do.
          1. Zoldat_A
            Zoldat_A 10 October 2015 22: 49 New
            +3
            Quote: gladcu2
            Just don’t think that the dollar will collapse and there will be a complete buzz in the world.

            Quote: gladcu2
            So without lazar guns can not do.

            Quote: gladcu2
            Do you propose while the states developing EM guns and combat lasers just sit and wait for the American bubble to burst?

            So nobody says that you need to hug your native AKMS and sit and wait until the Americans there set us up against military cyborgs with laser pistols. I’m just saying that swelling lards and inventing another stupid rubbish is very American.
      3. Azitral
        Azitral 10 October 2015 09: 00 New
        +10
        How would this clarify the simplest thought? It is getting to the very top of idiots and traitors that is called: "The system collapsed." A system with a “negative” selection of elites is a non-viable system. And - do not offer, please, simple solutions like the 37th year. This, in extreme cases, is suitable as a one-time action, at the very beginning, and is the worst principle as a permanent and basic method. Sooner or later, a handful of dignitaries will be selected who will be able to create a comprehensive system of deceiving the Leader. Even Stalin in recent years, in fact, isolated from truthful sources of information. No one can stand alone against the bureaucratic Golem, and this is the main drawback of autocratic structures.
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 10 October 2015 14: 04 New
          +1
          Azithral.

          You correctly described the reason, the dependence of the power structures of the state on the quality and level of responsibility of managers.

          But do not call it elites.

          This can be slightly reduced in number by transferring part of their functionality to computer programs. Transferring responsibility to the hard workers of computer experts who are ordinary hired specialists.

          Thus, these self-proclaimed elites. (Word, how disgusting) Will be reduced to residues 5% of the present amount.

          So, there’s a tricky screw on this matter.
          1. BMW
            BMW 10 October 2015 16: 40 New
            +3
            Quote: gladcu2
            This can be slightly reduced in number by transferring part of their functionality to computer programs.


            Heh, they made fun. Go to any office. Where one person was sitting with a pen and bills (well, a calculator), now three are sitting with computers and do not have time to do what this one did.
    2. Mera joota
      Mera joota 10 October 2015 08: 12 New
      +3
      Quote: VadimL
      Not sure about the effectiveness of such systems.

      At the institute, one teacher told us how he once doubted the prospects of cassette recorders because the reels gave the best sound. As a result, he turned out to be about five reel tape recorders, and they began to sell music only on cassettes and he had a problem where to put all this stuff ... I once had great doubts about the prospects of CD players, the first Vega CD players looked strange and cost a lot of money ... In the end, who needs these CDs now? A small flash drive holds as many audio files as I did on the cassettes (and there were a lot of them) ... and flash drives are no longer needed, everything is available on the network ...
      Ai um litter for verbosity, but it may turn out that our Navy will remain with "reel tape recorders" in the "era of Internet music" ...
      1. Awaz
        Awaz 10 October 2015 08: 42 New
        +1
        but do not forget about the many dead-end lines of development of the same storage media, and indeed the development of technology. Now no one knows how innovative this topic is (about lasers). Personally, I think, until we really came up with some kind of original way with a laser to destroy something or some kind of cunning laser, which would be used, for example, in an air defense system, it is probably premature to build the system itself. The modern laser system is not much different from the banal guns. If the laser system could create something like a dome or cover a specific sector with a solid shield - this is an innovation, and so on ... so far this is garbage - money wasted, if you put the laser as an air defense at the present stage. Although I may not know something, but judging by the fact that the Americans themselves showed - while they are engaged in throwing money
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Mera joota
          Mera joota 10 October 2015 09: 17 New
          +1
          Quote: AwaZ
          while this garbage is money down the drain

          You have other options how to step into the future without spending a dime for dead ends? Sorry, but this does not happen. The one who goes ahead of all is forced to spend more than those who follow.
        3. biznaw
          biznaw 11 October 2015 22: 59 New
          0
          Quote: AwaZ
          ... A modern laser system is not much different from banal guns. If the laser system could create something like a dome or cover a specific sector with a solid shield - this is an innovation, and so on ... so far this is garbage - money wasted, if you put the laser as an air defense at the present stage. Although I may not know something, but judging by the fact that the Americans themselves showed - while they are engaged in throwing money


          About the dome protecting the state from all air and land heaps, said Nikolai Tesla when he invited the Bolsheviks, Germans, Americans to invest in his ideas. The fact that he could get the probability is very high. The fact that he understood the physics of electric fields was not understood by any of the people living and living today. A sort of predecessor Neo from the movie The Matrix. After the scientist’s death, all the papers from his apartment disappeared, there is a version that this is not a matter of the special services of the states, but of the special services of aliens overseeing earthlings. By the way, at about the same time (before the start of World War I), an inventor was killed in St. Petersburg (either the forerunners of a beam generator, or the forerunners of a chemically pumped laser) with the help of which from a distance of several kilometers he lit candles on a chandelier in Tsarskoye Selo They were abducted.
    3. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 10 October 2015 08: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: VadimL
      Not sure about the effectiveness of such systems. In my opinion, it is more reasonable to spend "extra" energy on the operation of powerful electronic warfare equipment.

      For example, a Moskit anti-ship missile flies at a speed of almost a kilometer per second, and at the same time maneuvers, 1 second and a rocket a kilometer to the right, another second and a rocket a kilometer to the left, in order to bring it down with a laser, you need to accurately calculate at what point the rocket will be in the next second.
      1. venaya
        venaya 10 October 2015 09: 08 New
        -7
        Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
        ... For example, a Moskit anti-ship missile flies at a speed of almost a kilometer per second, and at the same time maneuvers, 1 a second and a rocket a kilometer to the right, another second and a rocket a kilometer to the left, in order to bring it down with a laser, you need to accurately calculate at what point the rocket will be in the next second .

        Sorry, I didn’t understand you at all!
        The speed of movement of a sun bunny is unlimited by anything. It can exceed the speed of light all the way to infinity. This feature is precisely laser weapons and no other.
        1. kare
          kare 10 October 2015 09: 34 New
          +3
          Quote: venaya
          venaya (1) RU Today, 09: 08 ↑ New

          Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
          ... For example, a Moskit anti-ship missile flies at a speed of almost a kilometer per second, and at the same time maneuvers, 1 a second and a rocket a kilometer to the right, another second and a rocket a kilometer to the left, in order to bring it down with a laser, you need to accurately calculate at what point the rocket will be in the next second .

          Sorry, I didn’t understand you at all!
          The speed of movement of a sun bunny is unlimited by anything. It can transcend the speed of light to infinity. This feature is precisely laser weapons and no other.


          In order for a solar bunny to be able to move at the speed of light, it is necessary that the device generating this same bunny should move at no less speed.
          Outline this device
          1. venaya
            venaya 10 October 2015 10: 15 New
            0
            Quote: kare
            ... In order for the solar bunny to move at the speed of light, it is necessary that the device generating this same bunny would move at no less speed.
            Outline this device

            Preliminary: in order to turn the tank gun horizontally, it is not necessary to turn the entire tank, it is enough to turn only the tower.
            In the same way, the question with the direction of the ray of light is resolving. In the XNUMXth century, a system of rotating mirrors was used for these purposes, the rate of change of direction is not very large. In the XNUMXth century, a system was developed for changing the angle of rotation of the laser beam using the Brega ultrasonic diffraction grating, in which case the speed of rotation of the laser beam approaches infinity. There are still options, I described only those that I myself used. The topic is not very open.
            1. kare
              kare 10 October 2015 10: 33 New
              0
              If I understand correctly the Brega diffraction grating, which has, say, the shape of a sphere, allows you to not rotate anything at all, except for the beam generating device located inside the sphere?
              1. venaya
                venaya 10 October 2015 11: 05 New
                0
                Quote: kare
                If I understand correctly the Brega diffraction grating, which has, say, the shape of a sphere, allows you to not rotate anything at all, except for the beam-generating device located inside the sphere?

                The Breguh diffraction grating is created inside any optically transparent crystal. How it should look specifically does not matter. As you correctly understood, there are no mention of any moving parts there, with the exception, however, of ultrasound itself.
            2. gridasov
              gridasov 10 October 2015 11: 24 New
              +1
              Sorry, but the so-called. The Bragg diffraction grating has a more significant function than beam rotation. A beam can generally be formed as a bunch of polarization of the "linear segment". If you understand, then the beam itself will “catch” on the object, if a certain potential is formed at the boundary of the polarization of the beam and this object. But Bragg's lattice is more important. We use the basic principles inherent in it when forming the density of a hydro-gas-dynamic flow.
              1. venaya
                venaya 10 October 2015 13: 18 New
                0
                Quote: gridasov
                Sorry, but the so-called. The Bragg diffraction grating has a more significant function than beam rotation. A beam can generally be formed as a bunch of polarization of the "linear segment". If you understand, then the beam itself will “catch” on the object, if a certain potential is formed at the boundary of the polarization of the beam and this object. But Bragg's lattice is more important. We use the basic principles inherent in it when forming the density of a hydro-gas-dynamic flow.

                I am pleased that you are using this effect. What you just wrote, I still need to think about it, many applications are possible here. In my posts I described only what I myself did, namely, inertia-free deflectors and modulators of laser beam intensity, and even with the participation of academic institutions. Those examples that you describe were not part of my work.
                1. gridasov
                  gridasov 10 October 2015 14: 19 New
                  +1
                  I will tell you more. There can be many such lattices, depending on the tasks that are set for it. Just like Tesla's bifilar coil, as we know it, this is only one particular solution. They can be at least nine in size. But since the magnetic force flows form the spatial structures of the interaction, and the electric current is only a linear impulse towards the optimal energy circuit, the same Tesla coil, like everything else, can be reduced to optimal forms of the device with practical application. The essence of a non-inertic deflector or modulator is precisely this induction coil, which forms the highest possible level of density, namely magnetic force flows, which form a unidirectional disturbance stream along the beam or other visible or invisible beam. Obviously, it is not for me to tell you that the laser beam is only a certain level and there will be a new and even more energy-intensive process behind it. That's what you need to think about already. By the way, now we can talk about a functional device that expands the potential of permanent magnets. Ie it replaces them.
                2. gladcu2
                  gladcu2 10 October 2015 15: 46 New
                  0
                  Venaya

                  It's ok

                  But what about the overall development.
          2. atalef
            atalef 10 October 2015 10: 52 New
            +5
            [quote = kare] [quote = venaya] venaya (1) RU Today, 09:08 ↑ New

            Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
            ... For example, a Moskit anti-ship missile flies at a speed of almost a kilometer per second, and at the same time maneuvers, 1 a second and a rocket a kilometer to the right, another second and a rocket a kilometer to the left, in order to bring it down with a laser, you need to accurately calculate at what point the rocket will be in the next second .

            Sorry, I didn’t understand you at all!
            The speed of movement of a sun bunny is unlimited by anything. It can transcend the speed of light to infinity. This is a feature of laser weapons and no other. [/ Quote

            In order for a solar bunny to be able to move at the speed of light, it is necessary that the device generating this same bunny should move at no less speed.
            Outline this device [/ quote]
            Are you seriously? A slight turn of the mirror by hand and the bunny has moved hundreds of meters, while the speed of the bunny and hands are somehow different by orders of magnitude
            1. kare
              kare 10 October 2015 11: 17 New
              0
              Quote: atalef
              Are you seriously? A slight turn of the mirror by hand and the bunny has moved hundreds of meters, while the speed of the bunny and hands are somehow different by orders of magnitude


              I meant a device generating a laser beam. It clearly does not resemble a mirror on the console. Therefore, I asked a question about the Breg grating
              1. fennekRUS
                fennekRUS 10 October 2015 19: 20 New
                +3
                Quote: kare
                I meant a device generating a laser beam

                I do not want to interrupt an interesting debate on take-off, but all powerful pulsed lasers. The device required to burn a rocket per kilometer of power, with continuous operation, will bask in the most indecent way. Difficulties are seen large, with the chasing of a bunny
                1. gridasov
                  gridasov 10 October 2015 20: 08 New
                  0
                  I will not recall the result of which is a laser beam. However, it can be theoretically justified that the hydro-gas-dynamic flow can be brought into a state of sonoluminescence, and then the light source can be light sources on the so-called static ionization, but on the dynamic one. But!!! This is very promising for the formation of a pulse of the corresponding level in an optical fiber communication channel. In other words, both energy security and the beam direction vector can come from the same source. In any case, it becomes possible to directly control the energy of the beam and its maximum parameters, and not as it is now.
                2. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 11 October 2015 14: 22 New
                  0
                  "during continuous operation will bask in the most indecent way" ///

                  For each target, the heating-burning time is calculated.
                  The light target - like a mortar mine with a thin body - burns through
                  in less than a second. An artillery shell needs a little more time.
                  It is clear that the ICBM head, protected from overheating in dense layers
                  atmosphere, gray, not gray, you will not burn.
                  GOS missiles do not need to be burned either: to blind a little and take away from the target.
                  1. fennekRUS
                    fennekRUS 12 October 2015 15: 22 New
                    +1
                    Quote: voyaka uh
                    blind a little and take away from the target.

                    I do not argue, a sound approach! But the GOS is not only with the IR and visual channels. Although, your approach seems promising. In general, the first adequate article, and no less adequate holivar in the comments (even surprising)
            2. gladcu2
              gladcu2 10 October 2015 15: 50 New
              +1
              atalef

              These kilometers are to the left, to the right. Not quite right. But this problem has long been resolved. Probably from the 80s. Automatic guidance is resolved from the moment of solving automatic target tracking.

              More importantly, this is the solution to the laser pump speed. And the preservation of its power at a distance.
          3. Archon
            Archon 10 October 2015 11: 20 New
            0
            If you make the gun rotate at the speed of light, then it will go from Newtonian physics to quantum physics. this is a completely different topic and the properties of matter and time are different
            1. gladcu2
              gladcu2 10 October 2015 15: 52 New
              +1
              Archon

              What are we talking about?

              They launched a stone at you. Where km to the left and right he flies to you at an acute angle. He is not a hummingbird who can change direction at right angles. To control the laser beam at an acute angle, the speed of the swivel mechanism is generally very small.

              Maneuvering a rocket is important in the fight against intercept rockets. There will still be an effect. And against the laser beam, it’s like a wall of peas.
              1. fennekRUS
                fennekRUS 10 October 2015 19: 22 New
                0
                Quote: gladcu2
                rocket warping is important to fight against intercept rockets. There will still be an effect. And against the laser beam, it’s like a wall of peas.

                Ultra-low approach height
                1. Ze Kot
                  Ze Kot 10 October 2015 19: 49 New
                  +1
                  Quote: fennekRUS
                  Quote: gladcu2
                  rocket warping is important to fight against intercept rockets. There will still be an effect. And against the laser beam, it’s like a wall of peas.

                  Ultra-low approach height


                  This is the reaction rate.

                  And if at high altitude? Perturbations of air masses, cloudiness, precipitation ... And if you still shoot traps when triggered by radiation sensors set ...
          4. gladcu2
            gladcu2 10 October 2015 15: 43 New
            +2
            Kare

            There is a concept of angular velocity. At small, sharp corners of the meeting, this speed is meager. But the problems of targeting high-speed targets have long been resolved. And this is what electronics do.
          5. Ladoga
            Ladoga 11 October 2015 21: 58 New
            +1
            ,, In order for the solar bunny to move at the speed of light, it is necessary that the device generating this same bunny move at no less speed. ,,

            This refers to the speed of movement of the light beam of the laser (bunny) on some imaginary surface.
            And yes, he, Venaya, is right. You are not . At a certain distance, the speed of movement of the bunny of the light beam will exceed the speed of light. It also depends on the angular velocity of the change in the direction of the light beam. The light generating device itself can be absolutely motionless, but the part of the system that generates and directs a coherent ray of light - it also does not move anywhere, but only changes the direction of the beam.
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 10: 20 New
          +1
          Quote: venaya
          It can transcend the speed of light to infinity

          Sorry, but you need to learn physics at school. The speed of a sun bunny CANNOT exceed the speed of light, because a sun bunny is the very light that is only reflected from the mirror surface, which “throws it away”. Accordingly, with a sharp shift of the mirror, the solar bunny will change its position not earlier, when the light reflected from the mirror reaches the surface on which it will “shine”
          1. venaya
            venaya 10 October 2015 10: 42 New
            +3
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            ... Sorry, but to you - to school, to study physics. The speed of a sun bunny CANNOT exceed the speed of light, because a sun bunny is that very light, only reflected from the mirror surface, which “casts it away”. Accordingly, with a sharp shift of the mirror, the solar bunny will change its position not earlier, when the light reflected from the mirror reaches the surface on which it will “shine”

            "In the garden of elderberry, ..."
            During school, I happened to get educational program from the beginning. laser laboratory, so by the end of this institution I had a clear understanding of the basic concepts. Here you have a frank shift of concepts, it will not be a secret for anyone that with a sufficiently fast rotation of the mirror, the speed of moving a bunny on a distant surface is not limited by anything and is clearly able to exceed the speed of movement of the light itself, this does not contradict even the school textbook and level of knowledge . Try to imagine this for yourself, and, in the end, after graduating from an educational institution, continue the process of education in the form of at least self-education, or consult, if the opportunity arises, with those who are specifically involved in this or similar issues. If you have short questions, then I can help you.
            1. Archon
              Archon 10 October 2015 11: 40 New
              +2
              speed will be measured in degrees per unit time and will be very finite. that is, in the end there will be an addition of speeds: the reaction speed of the sensors + the speed of information processing + the reaction speed of the operator (machine) + the speed of the laser itself (the speed of light in the medium) and much more.
              that is, the speed of the theoretical bunny may be infinite if viewed at infinite mathematical distances, but in practice it will be necessary to wait indefinitely for this unfortunate portion of photons to arrive at their destination. Look, for example, from the Sun to us, light comes in 8 minutes.
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 15: 43 New
              +2
              Quote: venaya
              It will not be a secret for anyone that with a sufficiently fast rotation of the mirror, the speed of moving a bunny on a distant surface is not limited by anything and is clearly able to exceed the speed of movement of the light itself, this does not contradict even the school textbook and level of knowledge

              It contradicts a little more than completely. Your postulate is refuted by elementary geometry.
              Firstly, there is such a thing as the speed of angular displacement. Let's say your mirror rotates 90 degrees per second. Let us also assume that a bunny during a rotation instantly changes its position on the surface on which it is reflected.
              Then the speed of the sun's bunny will exceed the speed of light (take enlarged - 300 km / s) if this bunny "runs" (ie, moves from its original position) to a distance greater than 300 km. Suppose a bunny has shifted by 300 and 600 km in the same second. - then the speed of light will be doubled.
              Moreover, it is obvious that we have an isosceles triangle, where one leg is the beam between the initial position of the mirror and the initial position of the bunny on the reflected surface, and the second leg is the beam between the mirror rotated 90 degrees and the end position of the sunbeam, but the hypotenuse is these are the same 600 km along the reflecting surface, on which the sun-bunny has shifted. I hope I explain it clearly so far?
              The length of the leg is calculated by the formula "the sum of the squares of the legs is equal to the square of the hypotenuse" and is 424 kilometers. Well, now it will be very easy for us to calculate how long the sunbeam will be reflected at the endpoint, 600 km away from the original.
              This time is defined as the speed of rotation of the mirror, plus the speed at which the light reflected from the mirror reaches the reflective surface laughing Physically this is so - first the mirror rotates, and at the moment when the mirror occupies its final position in space, the light reflected from it overcomes the distance to the reflective surface AND ONLY AFTER THIS, the bunny will appear on the reflective surface.
              Those. Your bunny will be reflected after 1 second, during which the direction of the mirror changes + 1,4 seconds, which are necessary so that the light reflected from the mirror reaches the reflective surface, i.e. after 2,4 seconds. In this case, the speed of displacement of the bunny on the surface (600 km in 2,4 seconds) will be 0,82 light.
              Your mistake is that you confuse the PROJECTION of the focus of the mirror (that is, the point at which the solar bunny SHOULD appear after turning the mirror) with its actual appearance. It is not the same:)
              And now let’s remember that a sun bunny is a reflection of light and we’ll see
              Quote: venaya
              During school, I happened to get educational program from the beginning. laser lab

              Which, excuse me, simply paused at a student who was unable to master the principles of physics and geometry.
              Quote: venaya
              after graduation, continue the education process

              In order to understand this issue, you need not a higher education, but at least a secondary imagination :)
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 16: 09 New
                +1
                Wrong formulated
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Physically this is so - first the mirror rotates, and at the moment when the mirror occupies its final position in space, the light reflected from it overcomes the distance to the reflective surface AND ONLY AFTER THIS, the bunny will appear on the reflective surface.

                The mirror rotates and at the moment the mirror takes its final position in space, the light reflected from the mirror BEGINS THE WAY from the mirror to the reflecting surface :) A solar bunny will appear only after the light travels the distance from the mirror to the surface.
              2. venaya
                venaya 10 October 2015 17: 16 New
                +1
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                It contradicts a little more than completely. Your postulate is refuted ...

                Thanks for the lengthy letter. Do you think that you can cloud my brain with scientific, almost logical conclusions? I'll try to convince you of this: Indeed, the beginning. academic lab., leading special. in his area of ​​the country, besides having family ties (therefore, he had no opportunity to play a trick), gave me the initial knowledge. But not in the area that you thought, but in another, namely in the field of logic. On this site, apart from me, no one raised the question of the need to study the subject of "logic" in high school, which we had before 1956, I believe that this is where all the problems are. It’s really difficult for me to explain rather simple things to people, possibly because in the future my teachers were really cool and we were able to easily communicate. I’m not talking about regalia, it’s empty (the example of the Nobel Prize is instructive), I have a relation of those around him. We are now at a military site, so I’ll try to explain a little. My education is like air defense, and there is such a thing as “preemption”. So, from your conclusions, it turns out that it is impossible to bring down an object flying at least at the speed of light with a light beam. I personally argue that it is possible to bring down an object flying with a laser beam at a speed significantly higher than the speed of light, and all this despite your long logical statements, the question actually consists only in the magnitude (angle) of lead. I think the answer I have given is sufficient, although it can be chewed ad infinitum. So it’s more careful to build your own logical conclusions, and to independently detect errors there. You can argue for a long time, it is important not to confuse yourself, especially those around you. Here is the answer, logical (even philosophical), whether the bunny of a light ray is able to exceed the speed of light. Think calmly, I’m not immediately asking for an answer.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 18: 31 New
                  0
                  Quote: venaya
                  Thanks for the lengthy letter.

                  Please.
                  Quote: venaya
                  You think you can brain me

                  No I do not think so. Some things are extremely difficult to fog. For example - a black cat in a black room, if you understand what I mean.
                  Quote: venaya
                  But not in the area that you thought, but in another, namely in the field of logic

                  If you do not know either physics or geometry, then logic in physical-geometric problems is no help to you. Unless you have to logically derive physical and geometric postulates (that is, independently establish the laws of physics and geometry theorems). By the way, logic should have told you this simple axiom, and if it didn’t tell you, I’m afraid that you are not at odds with logic either.
                  Quote: venaya
                  On this site, apart from me, no one raised the question of the need to study the subject of "logic" in high school,

                  Because, to be honest, he is not particularly needed. Computer science is much better at structuring thinking (I'm talking about flowcharts), and mathematics and physics allow us to develop mental abilities. But cramming the rules of formal logic ... it is unlikely that this will give something fundamentally better.
                  Quote: venaya
                  So, from your conclusions, it turns out that it is impossible to bring down an object flying at least at the speed of light with a light beam

                  Those. You don’t understand anything. From my example, NO impossibility implies the inability to shoot down a faster target with a lower-speed “interceptor” (no matter what acts in its role - a beam, a rocket or a ping-pong ball)
                  But not in any case, but if the initial position in the space of the target and the laser allows the possibility of the intersection of the laser beam with the target.
                  Quote: venaya
                  I personally argue that it is possible to bring down an object flying with a laser beam at a speed significantly exceeding the speed of light, and all this despite your long logical statements, the question actually consists only in the magnitude (angle) of lead

                  As for the "long logikoobraznyh" amused from the heart - a task at the level of 6-7 classes of the Soviet secondary school :)
                  Now about the lead angle. Your statement is only partially true.
                  A simple example is if the target moves away from you at a speed exceeding the speed of light, then no lead will allow the laser beam to bring it down. There is also a whole range of positions of the target at which it will approach you, but you will not hit it with a laser beam anyway - it all depends on the position of the laser and the target (including the distance between them) and the direction / speed of the target.
                  An example for the smallest. You are standing with a paper airplane in your hand. Over your city, right above your head, a Boeing flies. Obviously, no matter how preemptive you are to launch a paper airplane (even if it retains the speed given by your hand and does not lose it in flight), your airplane will never run into a Boeing.
                  1. venaya
                    venaya 10 October 2015 20: 34 New
                    0
                    Uryaaaa! VICTORY !!!

                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Quote: venaya
                    On this site, apart from me, no one raised the question of the need to study the subject of "logic" in high school,

                    Because, to be honest, he is not particularly needed.
                    Quote: venaya
                    So, from your conclusions, it turns out that it is impossible to bring down an object flying at least at the speed of light with a light beam

                    Those. You don’t understand anything. From my example, NO impossibility implies the inability to shoot down a faster target with a lower-speed “interceptor” (no matter what acts in its role - a beam, a rocket or a ping-pong ball)

                    Quote: venaya
                    I personally argue that it is possible to bring down an object flying with a laser beam at a speed significantly exceeding the speed of light, and all this despite your long logical statements, the question actually consists only in the magnitude (angle) of lead

                    Your statement is only partially true.
                    A simple example is if the target moves away from you at a speed exceeding the speed of light, then no lead will allow the laser beam to bring it down. There is also a whole range of positions of the target at which it will approach you, but you will not hit it with a laser beam anyway - it all depends on the position of the laser and the target (including the distance between them) and the direction / speed of the target. ...

                    "Your statement is only partially true. "- Partially not partially, but you confessed that there are conditions under which a bunny of a laser beam is able to hit an object that moves at a speed, including much higher than the speed of light. This is victory! I will notice that not only my personal, but also our common. You first switched to the elements of logical thinking that I demand from all the people around me, the problem is that they know me more and do not allow themselves to resist for so long. Usually, to prove this situation (about the bunny), it takes me 5-15 minutes, in the mode of communication through the site it turned out much longer. So, you just admitted that an object flying, even past the earth, at a speed exceeding the speed of light, can be attacked by a laser beam, while the laser beam bunny will be focused on this object and accompany this object during its flight time. That is, we have an object whose speed is higher than the speed of light, and the laser beam will be constantly focused on it, that is, it turns out that the bunny of the laser beam will mix past the earth, at the speed of the object that the laser beam is directed at. What is the result: The laser beam bunny moves relative to the earth at a speed exceeding the speed of light.
                    I think that now you will agree with me, I congratulate both of us on such a tremendous success. All previous, antilogical calculations crashed with a loud roar.
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 21: 24 New
                      0
                      Quote: venaya
                      So, you just admitted that an object flying, even past the earth, at a speed exceeding the speed of light, can be attacked by a laser beam, while the laser beam bunny will be focused on this object and accompany this object during its flight time.

                      When is that? I said that a superluminal target under certain conditions can be intercepted by a lower-speed interceptor, however, interception here means the combination of the position in space / time of the target and the interceptor. And by no means tracking the target with an interceptor for some time.
                      Do not ascribe to me what I did not say :)))
                      In fact, in SOME cases, it is really possible to combine and hold the laser beam on a target with superluminal speed.
                      Case 1: You are hanging in space somewhere near planet Earth. And suddenly, somewhere from the Sun, a rocket was launched right at you, flying at a speed 3 times the speed of light. Is it possible to hit her with a laser ?, which you hold in your right hand? Yes elementary! Why? Because the rocket flies right at you and the angular velocity of displacement relative to you is zero (you see the rocket as a point that flies right at you but does not shift left-right, up-down). And you shoot a laser beam directly towards the rocket and (taking the speed of the laser beam as the speed of light) the beam and the target will have a convergence speed of as much as 4 light speeds! The laser will hit the rocket and the laser beam will be on the rocket until the rocket hits you. In this case, you don’t need to accompany the target at all (you just aim at one point that does not move) and the laser beam does not need to move at superluminal speed :)
                      Case 2: You are hanging somewhere in space and near planet Earth. And suddenly, somewhere from the Sun, a rocket was launched right at you, flying at a speed 3 times the speed of light. But at that moment you were distracted by contemplation ... well, let's say Halley’s comets :)) And you noticed the rocket when, having made a small miss, it flashed a little past you. It seems that the situation is similar to the previous one - you see the rocket as a point, it does not move either left or right or up or down relative to you (more precisely, there is still an angular displacement, since the rocket passed you, but it is negligible), but can you Do you hit her with a laser? The answer is of course not! Because the laser beam will NEVER catch up with a rocket flying away from you. Even if you release the laser beam along the shortest path (directly to the rocket), the approach speed will be negative - the beam flies at the speed of light, and the rocket "escapes" from it at three speeds of light, i.e. the distance between the beam and the rocket is constantly growing.
                      Therefore, you can concentrate the "solar bunny" of your laser on a superluminal rocket only if its angular displacement is LOWER than the speed of light and at the same time, the convergence speed of the laser beam and the target is positive at least until the beam and target are combined in space. As soon as the speed of convergence of the beam and the target is replaced by the speed of divergence, under no circumstances will the beam hit the target.
                      And why? Yes, because the laser beam (and its bunny) cannot exceed the speed of light laughing
                      Quote: venaya
                      All previous, antilogical calculations crashed with a loud roar.

                      This is your "logic" crashed with a loud crash laughing
                      1. abrakadabre
                        abrakadabre 12 October 2015 12: 54 New
                        +1
                        Case 1: You are hanging in space somewhere near planet Earth. And suddenly, somewhere from the Sun, a rocket was launched right at you, flying at a speed 3 times the speed of light. Is it possible to hit her with a laser ?, which you hold in your right hand? Yes elementary!
                        Not allowed. Why? Because how do you know that a superlight rocket is flying through your soul? This is when considering our usual speeds (even the projectile), you can determine the fact of the attack before the projectile itself hurts you. Because the signal of an attack is a flash of a shot or reflection of a radar signal from an attacking object when radar returns to you at the speed of light. That is, with a speed much greater than the attack speed. So to speak, there is a third-party arbiter.
                        In the case of a superlight attack this will not happen. Any "bunnies" by which you are able to determine the presence of an attack or to track the trajectory of the attacker’s movement (when maneuvering) will be delayed with an ever-increasing interval, which will not allow you to be ahead of course or otherwise react to the attack.
                        An attacking superluminal object will always be ahead of the front of the electromagnetic wave, which carries information about the fact of the attack to you.
                      2. venaya
                        venaya 12 October 2015 14: 41 New
                        0
                        Forgive my colleague, but let me partially disagree with you - the fact is that you are making the experiment too specific, and the task is precisely in the theoretical aspect, we look:
                        Quote: abrakadabre
                        Case 1: You are hanging in space somewhere near planet Earth. And suddenly, somewhere from the Sun, a rocket was launched right at you, flying at a speed 3 times the speed of light. Is it possible to hit her with a laser ?, which you hold in your right hand? Yes elementary!
                        Not allowed. Why? Because how do you know that a superlight rocket is flying through your soul? This is when considering our usual speeds (even the projectile), you can determine the fact of the attack before the projectile itself hurts you. Because the signal of an attack is a flash of a shot or reflection of a radar signal from an attacking object when radar returns to you at the speed of light. That is, with a speed much greater than the attack speed. So to speak, there is a third-party arbiter.
                        In the case of a superlight attack this will not happen. Any "bunnies" by which you are able to determine the presence of an attack or to track the trajectory of the attacker’s movement (when maneuvering) will be delayed with an ever-increasing interval, which will not allow you to be ahead of course or otherwise react to the attack.
                        An attacking superluminal object will always be ahead of the front of the electromagnetic wave, which carries information about the fact of the attack to you.

                        See for yourself the error in the reasoning, you assume in advance that we cannot know whether a supersonic object will fly at us and when. Here you miss two possibilities: 1. In the end, you can include intuition. Who knows how fast it is spreading. 2. In addition to intuition, intelligence can be connected to the experiment, if not very good, but at least sufficient for this case. Intelligence can give us both the time of flight of a material / intangible object, and the coordinates of its flight. In this case, there is no need to use a sufficiently low (light) speed of evil magnetic radiation, because we must know everything necessary in advance. Under these conditions, an attack by an object moving at super-speed is theoretically possible.
                        I hope in this case, under these conditions, you will agree with the possibility of an attack by an object moving at super-light speed.
                      3. abrakadabre
                        abrakadabre 14 October 2015 10: 02 New
                        0
                        In this case, I do not agree with you. It is clear from the subject of the dispute that we have the only assumption - the presence of a hypothetical object attacking at superluminal speed. The rest of the world is accepted in accordance with the real world. Where there is the speed of light and all other physical laws and postulates apply.
                        Therefore, my previous comment is absolutely adequate: the transmission speed of any information in the system in question does not exceed the speed of light. Except for the actual attacking object. All ... my previous remark about the impossibility of learning about the fact of an attack before the attack reaches its goal and, accordingly, taking actions to disrupt the attack, completely lies in the plane of the situation under consideration. There are no errors in the logic.
                        If we pull the snake on the hedgehog with additional assumptions, then we will quickly slide into the fantasy world of magic and other magical joys, where the fact of the dispute loses its meaning.

                        In the given situation of the near-real world, it will be incredibly difficult to intercept an object that attacks even at near-light speed, which is completely allowed for the real world. Because the Doppler effect in its extreme manifestations will interfere with the observation of the attacking object:

                        - The length of the wave sent by the radar in the radio range, reflected from such a high-speed object, will shift to the X-ray range. And even in the gamma range. Moreover, when maneuvering an object, jumps in ranges are possible depending on the change in the trajectory of the attacking object and the corresponding change in the relative approach speed. So the radar station needs to have consistent channels in almost an infinitely large frequency range. The complexity of such an aggregate installation of incredible piling up of sensors borders on the existence of a superluminal object smile
                        - Also, the existence of the concept of visual observation of such a high-speed object in the light of the reflected rays of the same Sun is extremely controversial. Because the Doppler shift of the reflected radiation will be no less than in the case of an active location.

                        I agree with you regarding the fact that in some favorable conditions it is possible to intercept a high-speed object by means that have a significantly lower speed. BUT! Only when the speed of attack is radically different from the speed of light, as the ultimate speed of dissemination of information in our world. Or it also differs by orders of magnitude from the speed of dissemination of information obtained in some hypothetical way, announced in advance. But it is not comparable or exceeds it.
                    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 October 2015 15: 36 New
                      0
                      Quote: abrakadabre
                      Not allowed. Why? Because how do you know that a superlight rocket is flying through your soul?

                      Well, generally speaking, it’s somehow generally accepted that there shouldn’t be superluminal speed, right? But since my opponent announced its availability, it remains for me (so as not to complicate the example) to admit the presence of Superman glasses, enchanted personally by Gandalf and allowing to see superlight objects hi
                    3. venaya
                      venaya 12 October 2015 17: 14 New
                      0
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      ... it’s generally accepted that there shouldn’t be superluminal speed, right? ...hi

                      "superlight speed should not be"- This is only in theory, and in a theory of a very old one. In practice, cases of double speed of light are recorded, although, as far as I remember, particles lacking mass, but this was a long time ago, maybe there are more recent experiments. Science is moving forward, I’m moving forward I don’t always have time to follow the news, I need to prepare for everything that is possible, and not only in theory, all of these theories are unreliable.
                    4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 October 2015 22: 04 New
                      0
                      Quote: venaya
                      It is only in theory, and in theory very old.

                      I would practice, please. This one and this one is flying at superluminal speed, it was recorded then and then with the help of the hypnotic valve of the deluge system, or something else.
                      Quote: venaya
                      In practice, cases of double speed of light are recorded, although, as far as I remember, particles without mass

                      Yeah, tachyons. But the trouble is that they not only do not have mass, but are also unable to transfer energy :) Even theoretically :))
              3. Archon
                Archon 17 October 2015 12: 47 New
                0
                in this case, we can say that we must calculate the probable location of the rocket after an appropriate period of time and put the beam at that point so that the rocket runs into it on its own. but there’s no way to catch up
        3. abrakadabre
          abrakadabre 12 October 2015 12: 43 New
          +1
          Clouding the brain with science - it sounds powerful !!! After reading your entire argument with your opponent, I assure you that you can sleep peacefully, the fog of science does not threaten your brain.
        4. Archon
          Archon 17 October 2015 12: 41 New
          0
          an object moving at a speed close to the speed of light will not obey ordinary Newtonian mechanics. therefore, logic must be applied to another, corresponding to quantum mechanics. this is precisely the mistake and the dispute arises.
          in addition, it is physically impossible to timely respond to an object moving at a speed close to the speed of light.
      2. region58
        region58 10 October 2015 22: 17 New
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Physically this is so - first the mirror rotates, and at the moment when the mirror occupies its final position in space, the light reflected from it overcomes the distance to the reflective surface AND ONLY AFTER THIS, the bunny will appear on the reflective surface.

        And when will the bunny disappear from the previous position of the mirror? It is already rotated, and the photons are still flying ...
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 23: 04 New
          0
          Quote: region58
          And when will the bunny disappear from the previous position of the mirror? It is already rotated, and the photons are still flying ...

          It will disappear when the last photon reflected from the mirror hits the reflecting surface, is it really not clear?
          In other words - this is the mirror. It is aimed at a certain reflective surface. Light falls on the mirror. It is reflected from the mirror surface and goes on a journey to the surface, reflecting from which it will become a sunbeam. Those. at the moment of rotation of the mirror, those photons that are in motion from the mirror to the surface will continue to move. That is, the bunny will retain its position until all the photons reach.
          The bunny is late with respect to the rotation of the mirror :) Perhaps you have heard that some stars whose light we see could be destroyed thousands of years ago, but we continue to see their light moving through the abysses of space and we will see it for another thousand years. So understandable?
          1. region58
            region58 10 October 2015 23: 37 New
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            You have heard that some of the stars whose light we see could be destroyed thousands of years ago, but we continue to see their light moving through the abysses of space and we will see it for another thousand years. So understandable?

            Well, this is even closer to me than you think. Example: radius in one light year. Flashlight in the center. We turned on the flashlight, shining. The light will reach the circle in one year. In 1 second, turn the flashlight 180 degrees. In a year, plus one second, light will appear at the opposite point of the diameter of the circle. Multiply the length of the pi semicircle by the radius, that is, with a difference of one second, the light spot from our flashlight will describe an arc of 3.14 light years. And no fiction.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 October 2015 07: 23 New
              0
              Quote: region58
              Well, it's even closer to me than you think.

              Excellent!:)
              Quote: region58
              Example: radius in one light year. Flashlight in the center. We turned on the flashlight, shining. The light will reach the circle in one year. In 1 second, turn the flashlight 180 degrees. In a year, plus one second, light will appear at the opposite point of the diameter of the circle

              And I can tell you an even more terrible example. Here we have a surface, and on it there is a huge cavern of 1 light year long and a meter wide. Moreover, the cavity is not simple, the right wall is sheer, and the left one is beveled (i.e., it’s as if a monstrous right-angled triangle was driven into the ground, so that one leg is a meter, the second is light year, but the hypotenuse is the wall to the left :) )))
              Now we take a flashlight and in a second we spend it (without turning) over the cover. What's happening?
              Light radiation will rush down to take a year to run all the way to the vertical wall. And the solar bunny, which has just been reflected from the surface, appeared a meter from its original position, on the other side of the cavity in a second! Those. sunny bunny overtook himself :))) Hallelujah? laughing
              In fact, your example would be true if it were not for one circumstance - it was originally about the speed of a sun bunny. And the distances you have taken are such that a 300-kilometer ray of light ("released" by a flashlight per second of a turn) will be distributed over 3,14 light years, i.e. surface length of 29 707 million kilometers - it will be anything, but not a sun bunny.
              1. region58
                region58 12 October 2015 11: 49 New
                +1
                You would still figure out what a sunny bunny is. In our age of the Internet, there is a lot of information, though the problem has appeared - to find the truth in a heap of everything else. Yes, and with a light year you have a mistake, one light year is approximately 9 km, well, or 460 astronomical units (i.e.) or 800 parsecs. The speed of light is 000 km / s.
              2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 October 2015 15: 32 New
                0
                Quote: region58
                You would still figure out what a sunny bunny is

                And what do you think is wrong?
                Quote: region58
                Yes, and with a light year you have a mistake, one light year is approximately 9 km

                Yes, I made a mistake of 3 zeros, for some reason in the calculations I took not 300 km, but only 000 km / s.
                I sit down, deuce repeat
              3. region58
                region58 12 October 2015 20: 04 New
                0
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                And what do you think is wrong?

                Quote: region58
                a bunny, strictly speaking, is not a physical object

                This. Bunny is just a place where photons flew.
              4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 October 2015 22: 00 New
                +1
                Quote: region58
                This. Bunny is just a place where photons flew.

                And it always seemed to me that a bunny is a reflection of light from a reflective surface :)) In general, we see a bunny. And we can only see reflected light :)
                Therefore, I repeat, a sun bunny, like light, is quite a physical object (radiation).
              5. region58
                region58 13 October 2015 01: 31 New
                0
                Yeah ... Exactly about the money and the nightstand ...
        2. The comment was deleted.
    4. Archon
      Archon 17 October 2015 12: 58 New
      0
      mmm ... because in this way we get a ray in the form of a braid)
  • fennekRUS
    fennekRUS 13 October 2015 15: 22 New
    +1
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

    Which, excuse me, simply paused at a student who was unable to master the principles of physics and geometry.

    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    speed of light (take enlarged - 300 km / s)

    Why did you lower her poor by three orders of magnitude? All the same, the textbook does not hurt to refresh. And the ray of light is not equal to the "iron spoke". The flux of photons in your case at any infinitely small point in time in projection onto the plane of motion will represent a kind of piece of the sinosoid. So it is not for nothing that your comrades advise you to refresh the textbook in your memory. Your pearls are either trolling, or illiteracy. ))))) Do you design eternal engines?)
  • gladcu2
    gladcu2 10 October 2015 15: 58 New
    +1
    Venaya

    Eeee.

    The speed of light is considered constant.
    1. venaya
      venaya 10 October 2015 17: 21 New
      +1
      Quote: gladcu2
      ... The speed of light is considered constant.

      What do I have to do with it? You accept what you want, why touch me. Your laws (not accepted by me), you use them, but you don’t have to make a conformist out of me. Someone would read A. Einstein, otherwise everything is laziness and laziness, and teaching others is not laziness.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 14 October 2015 10: 22 New
        0
        If you had mastered the works of Einstein, and not apparently the popular arrangements of his theory (even you really hadn’t mastered them), we would not argue here. To read GRT and SRT with all the mathematical calculations - it is still reading. Here it is necessary for you to be with such disciplines, which are colloquially called higher education. I will not list everything in sections.
        1. venaya
          venaya 15 October 2015 04: 30 New
          0
          Quote: abrakadabre
          If you had mastered the works of Einstein, and not apparently the popular arrangements of his theory ...

          "Einstein’s writings, rather than apparently popular arrangements"- Here you or I made a mistake, I meant exclusively original recordings of Einstein himself. For all my life I managed to meet only one physicist who also read Einstein himself, and so, our opinion about his work coincided absolutely. But judging by that what you write, it is clearly visible that you were not able to get acquainted with the originals. This topic itself is quite long and has conclusions that are unexpected for the overwhelming majority of people. As for "popular arrangements"- this is clearly not for me, I just don’t want to discuss it.
    2. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 14 October 2015 10: 16 New
      +1
      The speed of light is considered constant.
      Eeee ... only for a specific environment, or vacuum. For which she is the greatest.
      Due to this fact, there is such a phenomenon as the Cherenkov effect.
  • atalef
    atalef 10 October 2015 10: 53 New
    0
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: venaya
    It can transcend the speed of light to infinity

    Sorry, but you need to learn physics at school. The speed of a sun bunny CANNOT exceed the speed of light, because a sun bunny is the very light that is only reflected from the mirror surface, which “throws it away”. Accordingly, with a sharp shift of the mirror, the solar bunny will change its position not earlier, when the light reflected from the mirror reaches the surface on which it will “shine”

    Theoretically - it can, but even moving and focusing at speeds close to the speed of light - gives tremendous advantages and prospects
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 16: 10 New
      0
      It can’t, but why - I wrote above.
  • region58
    region58 10 October 2015 14: 27 New
    +3
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Sorry, but you have to learn physics at school. The speed of a sun bunny CANNOT exceed the speed of light

    The thing is that a bunny, strictly speaking, is not a physical object. Therefore, it can move at any speed, because the movement of a bunny from point A to point B is not accompanied by a movement between these two points of either energy or information.

    And there is no contradiction with the postulates and conclusions of the theory of relativity here. Energy (and information) is transmitted only from the light source in the direction in which it (light) is directed.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 20: 14 New
      -1
      Quote: region58
      The thing is that a bunny, strictly speaking, is not a physical object.

      You deuce, let's get a diary. hi
      What is a sun bunny? This is LIGHT reflected from the mirror surface and hit a different reflective surface. Light is electromagnetic radiation, and as such, of course, is a physical object.
      Quote: region58
      Therefore, it can move at any speed, because the movement of a bunny from point A to point B is not accompanied by a movement between these two points of either energy or information

      As you may now understand, a sun bunny, being a reflection of electromagnetic radiation that has fallen onto a certain surface capable of reflecting light, when moving is just the same connected with the transfer of energy directly
      1. region58
        region58 10 October 2015 22: 08 New
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        when moving, it is just the same connected with the transfer of energy directly

        What (material) moves when a bunny moves from point A to point B? Nothing. Photons fly from a light source (in this case, mirrors) first to And then to B. Maybe you will figure it out first and then you’ll sculpt the deuces? ..
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 23: 18 New
          0
          Quote: region58
          What (material) moves when a bunny moves from point A to point B?

          The flow of electromagnetic radiation, you call it photons :)
          Quote: region58
          Photons fly from a light source (in this case, mirrors) first to And then to B. Maybe you will figure it out first and then you’ll sculpt the deuces? ..

          Yes, it was necessary to immediately set the stake, and with a minus.
          You have in your hands a spotlight pointing at a wall 200 meters from you. You turn on the spotlight. What do you see? A spot of light on the wall, right? Next, you move this spotlight from side to side. What's happening? You see that the spot of light is shifting in the direction of rotation of the spotlight. So or not? Or, in your opinion, the spot of light mysteriously disappears, and then suddenly appears in another place? laughing
          A searchlight is a radiation source and a radiation flux, changing its direction, it goes from point A to point B (you see it as a light spot on the wall)
          The same thing happens with a mirror and a sun bunny (there just a mirror reflects a stream of light, but does not generate it, that’s the whole difference)
          If it is still not clear, a very simple example is a watering can. You pour water to a point on the earth (point A). If you sharply turn the watering can so that it pours water to a point one meter to the right (point B), then how do you think - the land between point A and point B will be wet or dry? laughing
          1. region58
            region58 10 October 2015 23: 49 New
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            If it is still not clear, a very simple example is a watering can. You pour water to a point on the earth (point A). If you sharply turn the watering can so that it pours water to a point one meter to the right (point B), then how do you think - the land between point A and point B will be wet or dry? laughing

            And that water flows from point A to point B? Well, at the same time, calculate the speed of water from the watering can and the speed of moving the point where the stream gets. If you sharply (in 0.1 seconds) turn the watering can so that it pours water to a point one meter to the right (point B), then, in your opinion, it turns out that the water speed from the watering can is 10 m / s. Not too much?
          2. region58
            region58 11 October 2015 00: 02 New
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Quote: region58
            What (material) moves when a bunny moves from point A to point B?

            The flow of electromagnetic radiation, you call it photons :)

            The flow of electromagnetic radiation, in this case visible light, moves only from a light source (mirror). What is the source at point A? He is not there ...
            PS And why should something disappear? ..
          3. region58
            region58 11 October 2015 01: 25 New
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            If it is still not clear, a very simple example is a watering can. You pour water to a point on the earth (point A). If you sharply turn the watering can so that it pours water to a point one meter to the right (point B), then how do you think - the land between point A and point B will be wet or dry?

            By the way, from your example you can clearly see that the speed of movement of the point where the water flows (the bunny) depends only on the rotation speed of the watering can, and does not depend on the constant speed of the water flowing from the watering can (photon speed). Well, about the sputum of the earth - that's how you will twist the watering can ... smile
  • Rec
    Rec 10 October 2015 21: 54 New
    +4
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    The speed of a sun bunny CANNOT exceed the speed of light, because a sun bunny is that light

    That, but not that. One photon flies in one place, while turning the mirror to another place another photon flies. When a bunny moves along a wall, photons do not run along the wall, but fly from a light source to the wall.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 23: 27 New
      -1
      Quote: Rec
      When a bunny moves along a wall, photons do not run along the wall, but fly from a light source to the wall.

      That's it. More precisely, it happens this way - at every moment of time the mirror rotates, photons reflected by the mirror surface “fly off” from it and rush to the surface. But no matter how quickly the mirror rotates, the photon will not fly faster from this and will still reach the reflecting surface after a time equal to the distance between the mirror and the reflecting surface divided by the speed of light.
      Thus, the appearance of a “sun bunny” on a reflective surface always lags behind the rotation of the mirror by the time required for the photon to fly from the mirror to the surface. Therefore, you can rotate the mirror arbitrarily quickly - but the sunbeam will not be able to move faster than the speed of light (photons simply do not have time to fly :))))
  • Archon
    Archon 10 October 2015 11: 17 New
    0
    if they move the laser beam at the speed that you are talking about, it will lose the ability to hit the target.
    Also its speed can't surpass the speed of light. This is still a scientific fact.
    If you do not believe modern films, then you can watch this film, with all the actors familiar.
    https://youtu.be/PKpubFQhFGU
    1. venaya
      venaya 10 October 2015 12: 14 New
      0
      Quote: Archon
      if they move the laser beam at the speed that you are talking about, it will lose the ability to hit the target.
      Also its speed can't surpass the speed of light. This is still a scientific fact.
      If you do not believe modern films, then you can watch this film, with all the actors familiar.
      https://youtu.be/PKpubFQhFGU

      Thank you, I looked at this comic with Vitsin, really funny. Apparently you, like many, have not read a single line of the texts of Einstein himself. Actually, I was engaged in physics professionally, but the comments for the film are really entertaining, more useful than the film itself:
      THIS THEORY IS THE SAME MARASM, AS WELL AS THE INCREASED VALUE OF A KNOWN MARASMATIC SCAMER ...
      to understand this theory one must be a Jew.
      JUST NEED TO HAVE PROBLEMS IN THE RIGHT HEMISPHERE ....
      Great! And what actors .....!
      ba, allochka, demidova ... and did not recognize immediately ... mushrooms ... vicin

      I think you shouldn’t do physics on a military site, but think about the eternal, at least visit a psychiatrist’s doctor, although, as my friend the psychiatrist used to say: “This is not treated”.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 October 2015 20: 30 New
        0
        Quote: venaya
        Apparently you, like many, have not read a single line of Einstein’s texts

        Well, you read. Why, let me ask? If you have trouble with classical physics? What did you count on reading Einstein? This is the same as not knowing the alphabet, trying to master Shakespeare in the original.
        You know, there was such a Bell, he also invented the phone. Do you know how this happened? He imagined himself a Great Connoisseur of the German language, so he wrote out German journals on physics and electricity and independently read them. Somehow, in one magazine, he read the telephone circuit, and tried to repeat it ... it worked! the sound was transmitted over a distance by wire ...
        But bad luck - in the magazine that Bell was reading, there WASN’T any scheme :) It was simply that Bell, having a disgusting command of German, misinterpreted what was written, and managed to read something that was not and was not in the magazine :))
        You and Einstein are about the same. You read the letters, but what you understood as a result of this ... I doubt very much that you understand what Einstein wrote and that Einstein really wrote what you read from him hi
      2. Archon
        Archon 17 October 2015 13: 08 New
        0
        Well, this is your classic trolling. There is no point in arguing.
  • Rec
    Rec 10 October 2015 21: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: venaya
    Sorry, I didn’t understand you at all! The speed of movement of a sun bunny is unlimited by anything. It can transcend the speed of light to infinity. This feature is precisely laser weapons and no other.

    And for what they minus everything, that's right. Yegeshnikov seems a lot?
  • gladcu2
    gladcu2 10 October 2015 14: 13 New
    0
    Lt. Air Force Reserve

    Of course you have to shoot down at a line of sight.

    Let's say over the horizon from a person’s height at a height of 2 m is 7 km. From a ship height of 15 m. And add a flight height of the rocket of 25 m. Well, consider yourself according to the Pythagorean theorem.
    Offhand 30 km. Those. 30 seconds there is a pumping guidance and shot. Quite enough.
  • Samurai3X
    Samurai3X 10 October 2015 10: 15 New
    +1
    The big problem is that in the coming 20-30 years there will already be a laser combat weapon.
    In general, fabulous money was poured into the US nuclear project. The USSR was very lucky with the scouts, and with the morally normal scientists of the project. We were given the exact direction in which to go further. The United States simultaneously went in all directions. In comparison, we invested at least 10 times less than the funds for the nuclear project, thanks to intelligence.
    So you can laugh about new research, but these same research ultimately lead to a breakthrough that radically changes the tactics and strategy of war.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov 10 October 2015 12: 01 New
      +1
      This is an abstraction when someone discusses the relationship between the magnitude of investment funds and the result of scientific achievements. Without a scientific foundation, Americans. like everyone else, they will end up at the ultimate levels of achievement. And this may not correspond to the declared requirements at all. Therefore, any research should be calculated as an algorithm of duration, without dead-end research. This means, as they say in Russian, "a step forward and two back." So, the research plan should not be based on chaotic experimentation, but on thoughtful theoretical problems. Or am I wrong?
  • although
    although 10 October 2015 21: 36 New
    0
    And if you still put on the rocket an angular rather heat-reflecting reflector? And if the corner to the same hi
  • SeregaBoss
    SeregaBoss 10 October 2015 07: 17 New
    +1
    Thanks to the author, informative and informative. And highly reflective surfaces are not effective in counteracting laser guns?
    1. am808s
      am808s 10 October 2015 09: 18 New
      +2
      when acting on protected targets (ablative coating, highly reflective surfaces, body rotation, etc.).
      1. gladcu2
        gladcu2 10 October 2015 16: 01 New
        0
        am808s

        Well, that's a drop of common sense. Bravo.
  • Blackwizardru
    Blackwizardru 10 October 2015 07: 26 New
    +2
    Another cut grandmas bully
    1. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 10 October 2015 08: 35 New
      +4
      Quote: Blackwizardru
      Another cut grandmas

      What is the guy zamusunuyut? Sawing, and even cooler than ours, because more space for operational maneuver - more dough. Do you think that in America there are no Marshals of the Stools? It wouldn’t be - they would be water pumps, weddings and hospitals would not be bombed. And fifty of the defectors in ISIS for huge lamas would not be prepared. Remember the fake about the "space fountain pen"? A fake, of course, a fake - but the basic principle is caught correctly. To swell lards for the development of some useless expensive bullshit is purely American. And cho - everyone wants to eat hamburgers ...
  • BMW
    BMW 10 October 2015 07: 42 New
    0
    What struck me most was the phrase:
    However, some military experts doubt that these defenses will be able to withstand the new generation of winged and ballistic anti-ship missiles being developed in a number of countries, primarily in China.

    Is this what they started to write off from our accounts, and in the future we are written off to the scrap?
    1. Azitral
      Azitral 10 October 2015 09: 16 New
      +1
      The Chinese were ahead of everyone, creating a BALLISTIC RCC long-range. An individual warhead, maneuvering, and (for ballistic missile warheads this is the norm) hypersonic. In fact, strategic weapons, in my opinion, are simply atomic warheads. To combat AUG it is quite advisable.
      1. BMW
        BMW 10 October 2015 11: 28 New
        0
        Quote: Azitral
        The Chinese are ahead of everyone

        Am I behind godlessly? Chet, I doubt that we and the United States have been struggling with this for so many years and are only approaching this. And China, having nothing behind, just conquered hypersound. Link please.
        1. albanian
          albanian 12 October 2015 23: 35 New
          +1
          The Chinese were just the first to say that they could, no one bothers us, so to speak)
          What is available on their groundwork and testing does not stand up to criticism.
      2. Ze Kot
        Ze Kot 10 October 2015 19: 57 New
        0
        Quote: Azitral
        The Chinese were ahead of everyone, creating a BALLISTIC RCC long-range. An individual warhead, maneuvering, and (for ballistic missile warheads this is the norm) hypersonic. In fact, strategic weapons, in my opinion, are simply atomic warheads. To combat AUG it is quite advisable.



        Actually, this topic was studied by Soviet scientists. If you do not begin to develop further, it means either futile or very laborious.

        Given that they created just fantastic things, most likely the first.
  • Basarev
    Basarev 10 October 2015 07: 44 New
    +3
    A railgun is not so crazy idea. He is not a laser; you cannot prevent his mirror surface.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 10 October 2015 08: 16 New
      +4
      Quote: Basarev
      A railgun is not so crazy idea.

      Far from delusional and embodied in reality. Work is in full swing.
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 10 October 2015 09: 04 New
        +4
        Quote: Bayonet
        Far from delusional and embodied in reality. Work is in full swing.

        The railgun has long been a working model, but what could not be solved is the problem of instant energy storage, which makes this expensive machine a disposable syringe
        1. cosmos111
          cosmos111 10 October 2015 09: 41 New
          +2
          Quote: APASUS
          but what could not be solved is the problem of instant accumulation


          it is solvable IF transforming the energy of explosive detonation into an electromagnetic pulse ...

          Explosive magnetic generators as systems with decreasing inductance are optimally matched
          with railgun.

          When the VMG operates, electric currents of the order of 1-10 MA are generated. The conversion efficiency of the chemical energy of an explosive into electrical energy in a VMG can reach 10%. In a series of pulsed sources of electrical energy, the VMGs have the highest specific pulse parameters (-50 J / g). The maximum energy level generated in a single module reaches 100 MJ.

          Explosive MGDG is a stored explosive source of powerful pulses of electric energy; it can operate in the pulse repetition rate mode. The efficiency of converting explosive energy into electrical energy is 5-10%. The maximum level of generated energy is estimated by the value 10 MJ. The specific energy of a single pulse is determined by the parameters of the magnetic system and, when using superconducting components, is 0,3-0,5 J / g. MGDVG has practically
          instant readiness for energy production if the magnetic system is superconducting.

          http://www.ganzfeld.narod.ru/energ/variants.htm


          small-sized high-voltage explosive magnetic generators (VMG)
          explosive mass 0,1-1,0 kg
          energy in load 5-100 kJ


          and more about ideas ...
          "RELSOTRON" in the magazine "RADIO" making guns !! on the same physical principles, everything develops in a spiral ...

          article "Shooting range on the table" published more than 30 years ago in the 10 issue of Radio magazine by B. Fedotov, Moscow, for 1975 year
          1. cosmos111
            cosmos111 10 October 2015 09: 52 New
            +1
            explosive magnetic generator of the Moscow regional explosive center for collective use of the RAS ...

            output current 1000 kA, voltage 1 MV, power 800 kJ
          2. APASUS
            APASUS 10 October 2015 10: 39 New
            +1
            Quote: cosmos111
            it is solvable IF transforming the energy of explosive detonation into an electromagnetic pulse ...

            If I'm not mistaken, then this is our invention, but here you understand ..........
            1. cosmos111
              cosmos111 10 October 2015 11: 12 New
              0
              Quote: APASUS
              If I'm not mistaken, then this is our invention

              our ... Moscow regional explosive center for collective use of the RAS ...

              Sakharov Generator
              To obtain the primary neutrons that “start” the fission process in a nuclear warhead, an extremely powerful current pulse source was required. Generator A.D. Sakharov (Fig. 1) was a ring of explosive (BB) surrounding a copper coil. A set of synchronously detonated detonators initiated detonation directed toward the axis. At the moment synchronized with detonation, a capacitor was discharged, the current of which formed a magnetic field inside the coil. The shock wave with enormous pressure (about a million atmospheres) “shorted” the coil, turning it into a tube (liner) and closing this field inside it.
              http://www.borshec.ru/pages-view-28.html

              1. gridasov
                gridasov 10 October 2015 11: 52 New
                +1
                The system processes that Sakharov used say not only about his unique idea at that time, but that it is precisely a system of knowledge about email. magnetic processes in various configurations of space. Therefore, and at least we can talk about the possibility of creating an even higher potential pulse, and not only one-time using an external explosive pulse, but also reusable as a generator of ultra-wideband radiation and in the high potential of this polarization and breakdown of this circuit to the external medium if the goal is use as a weapon and an energy source, if it is a generator.
          3. Tambov Wolf
            Tambov Wolf 10 October 2015 13: 47 New
            +1
            You are mistaken, comrade. There is not a prototype of a railgun, but a prototype of a Gauss rifle. And these, as they say in Odessa, are two big differences.
          4. kocclissi
            kocclissi 10 October 2015 15: 44 New
            0
            Here is a toy piled until:
          5. fennekRUS
            fennekRUS 13 October 2015 17: 03 New
            0
            Quote: cosmos111
            transform explosive energy into an electromagnetic pulse ...

            and why fence the garden by introducing an intermediate link? maybe the accelerator on the explosive principle of the expiration of the working fluid is more logical? We’ll get the same speed, technically difficult to implement, but promises to be less moody than the “rail” IMHO
            1. abrakadabre
              abrakadabre 14 October 2015 10: 26 New
              0
              maybe the accelerator on the explosive principle of the expiration of the working fluid is more logical?
              So long implemented. Back in the 13-14 century. It is called gunpowder.
        2. Nikolay K
          Nikolay K 10 October 2015 10: 17 New
          +2
          Wrong way. The required projectile speed can be achieved by increasing the power, or by lengthening the accelerating section of the gun, the latter being an order of magnitude more efficient.
          1. cosmos111
            cosmos111 10 October 2015 11: 28 New
            0
            Quote: Nikolai K
            and it is possible by lengthening the accelerating section of the gun, the latter is an order of magnitude more efficient.


            I AGREE goodBUT NOT ALWAYS what .
          2. fennekRUS
            fennekRUS 13 October 2015 17: 11 New
            0
            Quote: Nikolai K
            elongation of the accelerating section of the gun, the latter is an order of magnitude more effective.

            Alas, no one canceled the friction and gas-dynamic drag forces. And the proportions between the long barrel and caliber have long been found. By the way, maybe someone knows Schauberger’s ideas in the shooter, whoever tried to use it? )
            modify the sleeve, and just the barrel can be lengthened, and squeeze a higher speed.
            1. abrakadabre
              abrakadabre 14 October 2015 10: 30 New
              0
              It would be interesting to see more detailed information. At what maximum barrel length ratio in calibers is it still possible to increase projectile speed? That with a further increase in the length of the barrel, its decrease will already be observed due to resistance.
      2. CAMS
        CAMS 10 October 2015 17: 11 New
        +1
        Our development of railguns is also underway, but the principles are different. Energy in the shell
  • VseDoFeNi
    VseDoFeNi 10 October 2015 08: 01 New
    +2
    Crazy people can only destroy and kill. Progress, however! fool laughing
    1. Ze Kot
      Ze Kot 10 October 2015 20: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: VseDoFeNi
      Crazy people can only destroy and kill. Progress, however! fool laughing



      The whole history of mankind is destruction and murder. request
      1. Michael_59
        Michael_59 10 October 2015 22: 29 New
        0
        Quote: The Cat
        Whole history of mankind


        This is induced from the outside.
  • Nik_One
    Nik_One 10 October 2015 08: 11 New
    +1
    Just some kind of deja vu ... I remember how at one time Reagan built a comic missile defense system on lasers. And now it’s reached the fleet ...)
    1. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 10 October 2015 10: 23 New
      0
      And with the help of a powerful railgun you can put satellites into orbit, which is an order of magnitude more efficient than using modern rocket launchers (they have a payload of a few percent, the rest of the fuel that is spent on accelerating itself). And in the future, not only satellites, but this is precisely from the theory of star wars and global strike. Let's remember our spirals.
      1. Ze Kot
        Ze Kot 10 October 2015 20: 23 New
        0
        Quote: Nikolai K
        And with the help of a powerful railgun you can put satellites into orbit



        And the satellite filling can withstand such acceleration and heat load?
        1. Nikolay K
          Nikolay K 10 October 2015 22: 04 New
          0
          The fact of the matter is that the question is what is the length of the acceleration section. In modern shells, electronics are able to withstand overloads. Now imagine if the accelerating section of the EM gun is a kilometer, the overloads will be even significantly lower.
          1. frollog
            frollog 11 October 2015 04: 07 New
            +1
            The point here is not so much overload. The railgun has a wild magnetic field when fired. All the electronics inside are burned out fuck. Until now, the guided missile from the railgun could not be launched.
            1. Nikolay K
              Nikolay K 12 October 2015 04: 03 New
              0
              And who said that the satellite should be INSIDE the railgun, i.e. to be a jumper itself? In firearms, for example, wad has long been used. By and large, an EM gun is only a device for converting electrical energy into kinetic. The advantage and at the same time the problem of which is that the conversion takes place in a very short period of time, which requires a powerful electric energy storage device. Therefore, I see a way to solve the problem in stretching the process of energy conversion in time by simply extending the accelerating section of the gun by orders of magnitude, using a spiral winding for compactness.
  • venaya
    venaya 10 October 2015 08: 29 New
    +2
    Laser weapons will allow, for example, to reduce the consumption of missiles to intercept UAVs and increase the number of missiles that can be used to counter anti-ship missiles.

    While the laser power is snotty, I really think to use them first by sparrows, that is, UAVs. The cost of the UAV is scanty, and the efficiency increases by the hour. In the future, from an economic point of view, perhaps the laser will turn out to be the most effective means of dealing with them. Otherwise, let's wait and see what else science will prepare for us.
  • Old26
    Old26 10 October 2015 08: 31 New
    +1
    Quote: Nik_One
    Just some kind of deja vu ... I remember how at one time Reagan built a comic missile defense system on lasers. And now it’s reached the fleet ...)

    It reached the fleet 10 years earlier than Reagan said about the Star Wars. Back in the early 70s, technical issues discussed this issue. But as far as I remember, laser (beam) and other defenses - this was supposed to be the "penultimate stage". The latter is the barrel artillery. That is, the defeat range in the region of 8-15 km, no more, or maybe less, I don’t remember exactly
  • Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 10 October 2015 08: 56 New
    0
    “However, of the total number of missile weapons, some are Tomahawk cruise missiles for striking at ground targets and anti-submarine weapons. The remaining number is the SAM, which can be up to several tens.”
    + More anti-ship missiles LRASM which will also occupy the UVP cells.
  • ZAV69
    ZAV69 10 October 2015 09: 46 New
    +3
    Laser weapons are highly dependent on the optical transparency of the medium. A cloud of smoke or aerosol on the path of the approach of a cruise missile and a laser gun is already useless. To organize this cloud is technically possible before the rocket approaches. So it’s better to leave laser weapons for arming space ships. But the railgun is quite a promising thing, although it has been known for a long time, but it has not yet been finalized. Wait and see.
    1. venaya
      venaya 10 October 2015 11: 18 New
      -3
      Quote: ZAV69
      Laser weapons are highly dependent on the optical transparency of the medium. A cloud of smoke or aerosol on the path of the approach of a cruise missile and a laser gun is already useless. To organize this cloud is technically possible before the rocket approaches. So it’s better to leave laser weapons for arming space ships. ...

      As you say, a laser beam of sufficient power pierces even metal, not to mention the air. It is problematic to create a counteraction to a powerful (super-powerful) laser beam.
      1. albanian
        albanian 12 October 2015 23: 47 New
        0
        Firstly, burn through centimeters of metal, this is not the same as meters of a dynamic medium with a non-stationary target. And secondly, it is likely that aerosols scattering / refracting radiation will be more popular than absorbing ones. Here, first of all, you need to find out what will be chosen for mass weapons, from the performance characteristics of the lasers and the aerosol mixture will depend.
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 10 October 2015 11: 28 New
      +2
      Quote: ZAV69
      Laser weapons are highly dependent on the optical transparency of the medium. A cloud of smoke or aerosol on the path of the approach of a cruise missile and a laser gun is already useless. To organize this cloud is technically possible before the rocket approaches. So it’s better to leave laser weapons for arming space ships. But the railgun is quite a promising thing, although it has been known for a long time, but it has not yet been finalized.

      I don’t disagree much, we need to work in both directions, but gausovka on the ground is more preferable, and the laser should be moved in the future, although for both it all comes down to minimizing the size of the batteries.
  • Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 10 October 2015 09: 50 New
    +1
    I still understand the dazzle guidance, but how can I focus 2-5 seconds on a warhead to burn through and detonate ???? It rushing and approaching can be from different azimuths, it rotates, maneuvers, the attack can be vertical ...
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 10 October 2015 14: 28 New
      0
      Here we already need a beam-plasmatron weapon - in 20 years, maybe we will see it.
  • kvs207
    kvs207 10 October 2015 10: 53 New
    0
    Quote: Mera Joota
    In the end, who needs these CDs now

    I need))) And cassettes too))) A reel, yes, have outlived their own.
    And on the topic. It seems to me that the laser beam can be scattered very cheaply and at the same time, efficiently.
  • gridasov
    gridasov 10 October 2015 11: 03 New
    +2
    You read about carts, tires, EM guns, explosive magnetic generators and marvel at the fact that quite enough knowledge has been accumulated, but no one is able to build a system as interconnected scientific foundations. It turns out that there is simply no banal system for analyzing large information data. We see particulars, but do not see the totality of interconnected processes.
    1. Michael_59
      Michael_59 11 October 2015 09: 04 New
      0
      Quote: gridasov
      We see particulars, but do not see the totality of interconnected processes


      We see what they give. In order to see more, you have to take it yourself.
    2. biznaw
      biznaw 11 October 2015 23: 50 New
      0
      Quote: gridasov
      ... We see particulars, but do not see the totality of interconnected processes.


      Well ... People who see the totality of processes in the history of mankind are probably no more than a hundred. First of all, it comes to my mind Nicolo Tesla, no one showed these aggregates to him, he “saw” them, Sakharov probably had this ability, ingenious designers and architects of the past “felt” the “material” without complicated computer calculations. You can’t give birth to such people with a state order, for God's will.
      gridasov, your nickname has a Ukrainian flag, are you geographically on a dead woman? I guess that you didn’t do such people in independent Ukraine by education and mentality ...
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 10 October 2015 12: 11 New
    +1
    Whatever the future might be with these weapons. There are even international restrictions on its use. The only problem that has not yet been resolved is the source of energy, the emitters are already quite on the level.
  • Dargavs
    Dargavs 10 October 2015 12: 27 New
    +1
    The development of science can go in very intricate ways, and the emergence of new technologies, materials, and even entire branches of science can instantly change the alignment in the field of armaments. Well, in relation to the article, the study of laser in the USSR and Russia is the most developed, which gives great opportunities, it is necessary to spend money on scientific and technological research, but it is reasonable. The education system is the key to solving new problems.
  • Felix
    Felix 10 October 2015 12: 33 New
    +1
    Quote: VadimL
    Not sure about the effectiveness of such systems. In my opinion, it is more reasonable to spend "extra" energy on the operation of powerful electronic warfare equipment.

    What kind of electronic warfare? Pindos used to solve such problems head on.
  • serverny
    serverny 10 October 2015 15: 35 New
    0
    Quote: Azitral
    the Chinese were ahead of everyone by creating a long-range ballistic anti-ship missile.

    mmm, and what is so unrealistic in ballistic anti-ship missiles?
    The Russian Federation does not have them only because they were cut according to OSV-2 - successful tests of the R-27K were carried out already in 1970.
    The missile went through a full test cycle and was ready for delivery to service.
    At that time, the main problem was target designation + passive homing head, but these problems would have been resolved in 45 years with state support.
  • Old26
    Old26 10 October 2015 17: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: serverny
    The Russian Federation does not have them only because they were cut according to OSV-2 - successful tests of the R-27K were carried out already in 1970. The missile went through a full test cycle and was ready for delivery to service. At that time, the main problem was target designation + passive homing head, but these problems would have been resolved in 45 years with state support.

    Actually, OSV-2 was signed in the late 70s, EMNIP in 1979. There was nothing on this missile there. The test passed, even stood in service for several years, but then it became clear that without a megaton charge it is useless ...
  • nazar_0753
    nazar_0753 10 October 2015 18: 47 New
    +1
    Designing and purchasing a new destroyer, which is a further development of the DDG-51 Flight III variant, which will ensure the operation of the SSL laser with an output power of 200 – 300 kilowatts or more and / or the operation of a megawatt FEL laser.

    Modification of the UDC design, which will be purchased in the coming years so that it is possible to ensure the operation of the SSL laser with a power of 200 – 300 kilowatts and more and / or a megowatt FEL laser class.

    Modification, if necessary, of the design of a new aircraft carrier of the Ford type (CVN-78) so that the SSL laser can be operated with a power of 200 – 300 kilowatts and more and / or a megawatt FEL laser.

    the author was too lazy to diversify the sentences, or at least combine them into one. Reading copy-paste is an unpleasant lesson
  • Ze Kot
    Ze Kot 10 October 2015 20: 25 New
    +1
    While the Americans are “building” another laser cannon, the Russian satellite is either aiming or listening to communications satellites:

    "Several meetings were held at the US Department of Defense to discuss the dangerous maneuvers of the Russian Luch satellite. The spacecraft was extremely close to the two Intelsat satellites, Space News reports.

    Recently, the “Ray” several times approached satellites at a distance of up to 10 kilometers. As a result, Intelsat representatives decided to contact the Pentagon, and also sent a request to the Russian side. The answer to this appeal has not yet been received. According to other sources in Space News, the device three times approached Intelsat satellites at a distance of up to five kilometers.

    “This is abnormal behavior and we are worried,” said Intelsat President Kay Sears. She clarified that the “Luch” did not interfere with the operation of the Intelsat 7 and Intelsat 901 satellites. Presumably, the Russian satellite has been between the devices for five months. "

    https://news.mail.ru/politics/23589495/?frommail=1
  • Alexy
    Alexy 11 October 2015 03: 02 New
    +1
    The article was written by a person absolutely far from the concepts and principles of the combat use of the Navy. Modern naval combat lasts a few minutes and ammunition is more than enough. Such a huge number of tomahawks on American ships is intended solely for striking the coastal objects of the natives. The development of combat lasers was also carried out in the union. Unfortunately I do not know the picture in modern Russia. Perhaps for air defense and missile defense, the use of lasers is justified, but only in the near field. But honestly, it smells like another cut of the Pentagon budget.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 12 October 2015 16: 15 New
      0
      "Modern naval battle lasts a few minutes" ///

      Do you have a real-life example of modern naval combat? smile
  • igor36
    igor36 13 October 2015 10: 06 New
    0
    The cost of ship fuel for generating the electricity needed to fire an electrically pumped laser is less than one dollar per shot,

    Nonsense is complete. A normal generator gives 3-4 kW of electricity per liter of diesel fuel. The pulse power of a combat laser is from 100 kW, respectively, 30 liters of fuel are needed per pulse only. Add the power of cooling systems, control systems, only for fuel you need $ 4. This is nonsense, of course, the main part of the cost is the cost of a laser installation, additional generator power and laser consumables. $ 4 is not the cost of the rocket of course, but if you bring the numbers, be prepared to answer for them.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 13 October 2015 19: 55 New
      -1
      Kilowatt hours, electricity.
      That is, if it gives 3-4 kilowatt-hours of electricity, then for a shot of 100 kilowatts which lasts 2 seconds, for example, it is necessary.
      1\(3600\2*3\100)= 1,851*10^-2 литра топлива.
      Or 0,01851 liters of fuel.
      In Moscow
      Single rate
      rub / kWh
      4,68
      Those
      If you take electricity from a power outlet in Moscow for power, a 100 kilowatt laser, and the shot lasts 1 second, then it will cost 1 \ (3600 \ 100) * 4.68 = 13 kopecks, now it’s 60 rubles in a dollar, that is, the price of electricity at a shot in 1 second is negligible. If the shot is extended for a minute, then the shot will cost 7.8 rubles, which is also significantly lower than the announced buck
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 14 October 2015 10: 33 New
        +1
        Invalid calculation.
  • bmv04636
    bmv04636 14 October 2015 15: 20 New
    0
    everyone forgot that the earth is not flat, but round and has a curvature, i.e. a radius.
  • neo1200
    neo1200 28 December 2015 21: 53 New
    0
    Yes, all these laser and electromagnetic weapons were written before. The Americans, as always, bravely declare that they have passed successful tests and, after five years, the laser weapons will definitely enter the troops. It seems like five years and no laser weapons enter the troops. For example, I trust those authors who write that real combat prototypes of laser weapons will be created no earlier than 30 years.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 29 December 2015 14: 19 New
      0
      You better trust those who normally studied physics at school and then at college. The use of lasers instead of small arms and artillery weapons in atmospheric conditions is unpromising. If not to say, it is futile.
      Only for communication, location, measurements, blinding of the optics of the enemy - is normal and used.