Military Review

In the US, solve the problem of cooling lasers installed on airplanes

112
In the course of the research, Northrop Grumman proposed a fundamentally new method of laser cooling. weapons airborne. According to experts, this will help adaptive turbojets, reports Rossiyskaya Gazeta with reference to the resource Aviation Week.




“The studies have not yet been completed and the experts have not reached a final conclusion on how the heat will be removed from the lasers. As one of the options, the creation of a heat accumulator is considered, which, when filled, will transfer heat to the dissipating circuit, ”writes the publication.

According to the information of the resource, “the contour itself is built in such a way that its scattering elements will enter the third contour of the adaptive turbojet engine of the aircraft through which cold air passes during the flight.”

According to the developers, “such a multistage scheme of heat removal and dissipation will allow you to make an unlimited supply of shots for the laser, since the pilot in battle will not have to wait for the system to cool.”

In addition, it is argued that such a scheme "will increase the level of stealth aircraft in the thermal range."
Photos used:
www.tek.no
112 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 16 December 2015 14: 27 New
    11
    Reigon died, the Star Wars program is also covered ... although a great way to cut the budget, and everyone is happy
    1. SAM 5
      SAM 5 16 December 2015 14: 28 New
      +1
      Well, let them dream.
      1. cniza
        cniza 16 December 2015 14: 33 New
        +2
        Somewhere we already went through this; one of the factors of the collapse of the USSR is being tried to apply to Russia.
        1. Throw
          Throw 16 December 2015 16: 02 New
          0
          There was already a lot of news that amers allegedly brought down something with a laser power of 2,5 kW.
          And I called it a FLYING KETTLE!
          And so it turned out! laughing
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 16 December 2015 14: 31 New
      +1
      will allow you to make an unlimited supply of laser shots, because the pilot in battle will not have to wait for the cooling system

      What are they thinking of powering the laser? Solar panels?
      Or will they only have them for setting labels on objects?
      1. nov_tech.vrn
        nov_tech.vrn 16 December 2015 15: 31 New
        +8
        Everything is very simple, the pilot goes to the dark side of the force and receives an inexhaustible source of energy! This episode has not yet been filmed.
        1. proletarian
          proletarian 16 December 2015 23: 29 New
          0
          Well, yes, the pilot goes over and starts sucking (well, if not power, then everything that he can), at least he won’t stay hungry.
      2. cap
        cap 16 December 2015 15: 46 New
        +1
        Type Star Wars Part Two laughing .
    3. sannych
      sannych 16 December 2015 14: 31 New
      +4
      The film "Star Wars" still does not give rest, give a lightsaber to every pilot of the US Air Force!
    4. yuriy55
      yuriy55 16 December 2015 14: 34 New
      +3
      Hello! It’s covered, how come! And this:
    5. Ami du peuple
      Ami du peuple 16 December 2015 14: 37 New
      +9
      Quote: Sasha 19871987
      a great way to cut the budget - and everyone is happy

      "Unlimited shots" means that we are talking about a combat laser? I understand that the most basic problem - the energy one, have the Americans already decided, since they have taken care of cooling? Oh well...
      1. Saburov
        Saburov 16 December 2015 14: 50 New
        24
        The main and insurmountable obstacle, the fundamental laws of physics, namely, the shorter the wavelength, the more difficult it is to implement quantum amplification of radiation. That is to build a laser. Laserophiles will say: well, maybe the beam can be concentrated on a small area and thereby achieve a much greater effect with less power? Indeed - after all, industry uses laser machines that quietly cut centimeter steel with powers of only about a few kilowatts. At the same time, their rays are focused on a patch of several millimeters in size. Alas! Here, the physically irresistible diffraction law comes into force, which states that the laser radiation always diverges from the angle = wavelength / beam diameter. At distances of the order of meters, it can be ignored. So what is next? If we take specifically a combat infrared laser with a wavelength of 2 μm (THEL combat lasers work at such a length, etc.) and a beam diameter of 1 cm, then we get the angle of divergence 0.2 of the milliradian (this is a very small difference - for example, ordinary laser pointers / rangefinders diverge by 5 milliradians and more). Divergence 0.2 mrad. at a distance of 100 meters it will increase the diameter of the spot from 1 cm to approximately 3 cm (if anyone else remembers school geometry). That is, the impact density will fall in proportion to the area in 7 times only by 100 meters. That is: if we know that a laser with a power of 100 KW burns an inch steel plate at point-blank somewhere in 2-3 seconds, then at a distance of 100 meters it will do this, roughly, 18 seconds. All this time, an armored personnel carrier (or whom you are going to burn there) must by itself patiently stand and wait. Do not violate those. process, so to speak. Well, as you know - a furrow of a couple of centimeters is unlikely to upset him anyway. For comparison: armor-piercing bullets from Kalashnikov calmly pierce 16 mm steel at the same distance.
        1. Saburov
          Saburov 16 December 2015 14: 55 New
          22
          Practical experiments have already been scientifically proven, documented, and even carried out on the example of the Laser program in the USSR long before the USA and Israel such as Terra-3, A-60, SKIF space program, ship Foros and Dixon and so on, because the main problem has not been solved (if suddenly the laws of physics do not change). So these stories about shot down missiles and shells (which by the way are not confirmed by anything, except for commercials where there is no data on range, nature of the target, trajectory, number of salvos, material, etc.) are not worth a penny, unless of course you are friends with physics .
          PS The USSR at one time went all the way to create a combat laser from and to what the United States is now doing and reinventing the bicycle, I won’t be surprised if they soon begin to build an installation similar to Terra-3, but in the USSR they realized the futility of these weapons in time, except to blind and burn the enemy’s optics, the laser is not capable of more in combat conditions, due to weak power, irresistible laws of physics and elementary and CHEAP methods of protection against it, well, naturally, speaking about the laser, for some reason everyone forgets about the problem energy and cooling methods as e.g. Firestrike. Hmm .. And really, a very compact little thing - 7 blocks each weighing 180 kg. Total 1300 kg. So that? A dream come true? Let's not rush. There are a couple of nuances. This huge cabinet weighing per ton is just the radiating unit itself. At least 500 kW should be supplied with electric power, given that the achieved efficiency of this laser is about 20%. (and even that is very doubtful, usually much less - less than 10%). Thus, 100 kW went into the enemy with us, and 400 kW remained in this cabinet. And these kilowatts need to be put out quickly, right? Otherwise, expensive optics will suffer. The dimensions of a cooling system of such power can be imagined by looking, for example, at a cooling installation. A rather big bandura, weighs 120 kg. The system can just serve for cooling industrial lasers; it diverts power from as many as whole 6 kW. And she consumes the same amount of electricity. So you need something the size of a truck to cool our 100 kW cabinet when firing. And all this in total will consume megawatts of electric power under 1. Well how? So this is a natural divorce of suckers (military and taxpayers) on the headstock by American scientific and technical scams. For the reason that in the foreseeable future, “combat lasers” are not able, in principle, even to approach combat good old good guns / missiles. In the best case, their destiny is extremely narrow, specific areas of application such as burning optics for reconnaissance. equipment, sights, etc.
          1. andj61
            andj61 16 December 2015 15: 06 New
            +4
            Quote: Saburov
            in the foreseeable future, “combat lasers” are not able, in principle, even to approach the good old guns / missiles in combat effectiveness. In the best case, their destiny is extremely narrow, specific areas of application such as burning optics for reconnaissance. equipment, sights, etc.

            good For such narrow-specific applications, such fools with a capacity of more than a hundred kilowatts are not necessary to use, you can do much less power.
            But with extra-atmospheric use, the combat effectiveness of lasers increases dramatically and it becomes a very effective weapon.
            True, we have not yet reached the era of "Star Wars" ...
            1. Saburov
              Saburov 16 December 2015 15: 18 New
              +3
              What are you saying? That is, the laws of fluctuations and diffraction suddenly changed? Dear, everything has been calculated and tested for a long time already, but it would not hurt you to plunge into the school physics course.
              1. andj61
                andj61 16 December 2015 15: 48 New
                +3
                Quote: Saburov
                What are you saying? That is, the laws of fluctuations and diffraction suddenly changed? Dear, everything has been calculated and tested for a long time already, but it would not hurt you to plunge into the school physics course.

                Yes, I passed - and a school course, and institute, and even purely by chance in the 80's after the institute participated in the testing of a prototype combat laser. A range of more than 2 km in the atmosphere was then considered extremely inefficient for laser applications. But in space - a completely different matter. And let me be curious about the diffraction of monochrome coherent radiation in a vacuum - what do you mean? Diffraction in the optical system itself? It does not differ at all from that on earth.
                Diffraction is a set of phenomena observed during the propagation of light in a medium with sharp inhomogeneities, for example, near the boundaries of opaque or transparent bodies, through small holes, etc. Diffraction, in particular, leads to the rounding of obstacles by light waves, the penetration of light into the region of the geometric shadow, and to a deviation from the laws of geometric optics.

                If in the course of propagation, then what is the diffraction in vacuum?
                And the fluctuation in the vacuum in any case will be less than on the ground, especially considering the low temperatures.
                And I don’t understand that you were outraged - your previous comment is completely consistent with mine - I just added that VERY powerful devices are not needed at all for burning optics. And about the possibility of effective use of a laser in a vacuum.
                1. Throw
                  Throw 16 December 2015 16: 15 New
                  +3

                  If in the course of propagation, then what is the diffraction in vacuum?

                  In vacuum, there is beam diffraction — this is due not to the theory of secondary emitters in the medium, but to the wave nature of the radiation.
                  There is no vacuum dissipation beam energy.

                  Saburov - already in 10 times you are reposting and copy-paste, indicate the link to the source:
                  http://gosh100.livejournal.com/31709.html
                  1. gridasov
                    gridasov 16 December 2015 16: 32 New
                    0
                    In vacuum, all processes occur "identically" as in the atmosphere. That is, their processuality is indicated by other algorithms, vectors of influence forces, and we will say the fractality of the level of energy interactions, but the methodology for analyzing these processes remains the same. And in general, can anyone understand that the same dissipation is not abstract transitions of a certain energy, but a consequence of the interaction of magnetic force flows of the corresponding dimension, vectors and potential, which means that "heat" is the gradient of the process and this process can be manipulated. At least transferring heat at the moment of spin the corresponding process of magnetic interactions. Therefore, first you need to determine exactly what we mean by vacuum, energy, wave (which development vector) and much more. Until a person learns to analyze the entire totality of information, and often full of contradictions, and does not learn to take into account everything, there will be no “forward” movement.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. 52
                        52 16 December 2015 16: 41 New
                        +2
                        not only found, but also ate ... laughing
                    2. Throw
                      Throw 16 December 2015 16: 42 New
                      +1
                      Hosspad, Gridasov again found red pills ... wassat

                  2. Saburov
                    Saburov 16 December 2015 18: 58 New
                    +2
                    Yes, my hands already hurt me from copying the same thing, simply for the most part, laserophiles do not want or do not want to study, to fully understand the physical properties and problems of building a laser.
                2. Saburov
                  Saburov 16 December 2015 19: 05 New
                  +2
                  Quote: andj61
                  Yes, I passed - and a school course, and institute, and even purely by chance in the 80's after the institute participated in the testing of a prototype combat laser. A range of more than 2 km in the atmosphere was then considered extremely inefficient for laser applications. But in space - a completely different matter. And let me be curious about the diffraction of monochrome coherent radiation in a vacuum - what do you mean? Diffraction in the optical system itself? It does not differ at all from that on earth.

                  What kind of institute? Let's start from the beginning and as simple as possible.
                  In principle, electromagnetic waves can be focused, as Alexey Tolstoy wrote, and, in general, all existing projects are not far from the immortal “hyperboloid”. But no matter how precisely the focusing mirrors were made, the beam still, alas, diverges. And the degree of this discrepancy is directly proportional to the radiation wavelength divided by the beam diameter. It turns out that the shorter the wave and the wider the beam, the smaller the discrepancy. And in order for the beam to be effective, it must be thin, otherwise all the power is scattered over too large an area.
                  The main military effect of the laser beam is purely thermal, light quanta should simply be absorbed by the affected object and heat it to such a state that it becomes unusable. In order to influence the target (the metal hull of a ship or satellite), a certain number of joules must reach it. It is difficult to say exactly how much, and even if this is known, they will most likely not talk about it loudly. And yet, apparently, it is at least several tens or even hundreds of megajoules - for such vulnerable objects as a rocket with a full fuel tank, and no less than thousands megajoules - for nuclear warheads that successfully overcome dense layers of the atmosphere without losing operability . For a continuous laser, even without taking into account the beam divergence, we are already talking about powers of thousands of megawatts. But then it turns out that the power of the energy source should be millions of kilowatts! And indeed it is.
                  1. Saburov
                    Saburov 16 December 2015 19: 06 New
                    0
                    In addition, it is pointless to constantly shine a laser over empty space - first you need to point it at the target and only after that “cut” it at full power. The reactor does not work well in such a "torn" mode. In battle, if enemy warheads fly in hundreds, and there is no time to allocate false targets, the laser will have to be fired quite often, and for this reason most of the developed combat lasers are chemical. Combustion of gaseous fuel (remember the pyramids of engineer Garin?) Brings the internal environment of the laser into an excited state, and it begins to generate powerful electromagnetic radiation. Therefore, it will be necessary to act as follows - fired, purged the system, filed a new portion of reagents, and only after that - a new salvo ...
                    And yet, suppose that energy is found: for example, an 1 ton of fuel per 1 shot. As is known, the usual laser operation scheme provides for the “pumping” of the working medium (crystal or gas) with energy up to a certain level, and when a jump occurs, the accumulated energy is discharged by a light beam of a certain wavelength. But where to get that energy that did not go to the goal with the beam? So, for the most part, it will stand out in the firing device in the form of heat. Thus, only 40% will go to the goal (although in reality no more than 10%), but the remaining 60% will remain with us. And therefore, even having damaged an enemy ship, we can easily vaporize our own. It is no accident that even in much less powerful earthly installations, flowing water cooling is used not only for mirrors, but also for the working volume of the laser.
                    1. Saburov
                      Saburov 16 December 2015 19: 06 New
                      0
                      In principle, of course, you can cut the enemy battleship with a hyperboloid beam, but the glowing “Pyramids of Engineer Garin” will heat the hyperboloid several times stronger than the cut armor. So how then do lasers cut metal? But there both the volume of the working fluid where the laser beam is generated and the dimensions of the focusing system are incomparably larger than the heating zone.
                      However, shooting from space at ground or atmospheric targets in certain conditions can be effective. A laser beam in a gas can undergo "self-focusing" when the atmospheric channel heated by the laser becomes a kind of optical fiber. The beam is also able to focus to a point that can become a source of x-ray radiation due to colossal heating in the area of ​​self-focusing. The main thing here is to use this effect so that such a point appears at the right time and in the right place ...
                      There is another problem - existing beam focusing systems use reflective mirrors. So what prevents the enemy from using the same mirror coating as a defense? Not to mention the simple rotation of the warhead, which reduces the efficiency of beam weapons by a factor of ten. Lasers had two drawbacks: low power and beam divergence. Whatever the power, but if a beam of radiation with a diameter of several kilometers falls on the target, the benefit of such a laser is zero — unless you can make a rangefinder out of it ... There is only one way to deal with beam divergence — by reducing the wavelength. However, it follows from the fundamental laws of physics that the shorter the wavelength, the more difficult it is to implement quantum amplification of radiation, or, in human terms, to build a laser. The first quantum amplifiers (masers), created in the distant 1950's, worked in the radio range (rather long waves), after a decade, lasers operating in the optical range appeared. And a decade later, a theoretical and experimental basis was formed for creating a laser in the x-ray range. However, to use such a laser as a gun for firing at warheads, fantastic pumping energy was required. Only a nuclear explosion could give it.
                      1. andj61
                        andj61 16 December 2015 22: 07 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Saburov
                        a decade later, a theoretical and experimental basis was formed for creating a laser in the x-ray range. However, to use such a laser as a gun for firing at warheads, fantastic pumping energy was required. Only a nuclear explosion could give it.

                        These are exactly the R&D projects that were carried out in the USA as part of the SDI. And the laser prototype seemed to be created, but there were problems with the application. Due to the ban on the deployment of nuclear weapons in space, a nuclear-pumped X-ray laser was supposed to start from a submarine and, after entering orbit, begin to shoot down our warheads. But with the simultaneous launch with our missiles, the lasers were hopelessly lagging behind, it was necessary to put into the orbit of a nuclear conflict, and this fact itself could already cause a conflict. In addition, very low-cost means — smoke of the launch areas, even small maneuvering in the active section, disruption of the brightness of the engine torch due to chemical additives in the fuel — significantly reduced the effectiveness of the combat use of such a laser. But if, on the active site, burning the tank’s hull is still possible in principle: the geometrical dimensions are large, and this burning is already a task, then burning the warhead’s hull on the passive site is not a trivial task. And the USSR openly declared an answer: we will launch hundreds and hundreds of "empty" missiles, i.e. with "empty" warheads - the USSR could really do this. Try to knock them all down even with real nuclear-pumped X-ray lasers in orbit! So such a missile defense laser was a dead-born idea precisely because of the impossibility of effectively performing missile defense tasks. This is not to mention the fact that it did not come to real tests of such a laser.
                        But against satellites, he could work quite successfully.
                        In order of information - I graduated at 1984 MVTU im. Bauman, but the specialty was not directly related to lasers. After the institute he worked at the Research Institute-4 MO, it was the head institute of the Strategic Missile Forces. Here, when testing our product, I observed the tests of a prototype combat laser. At a range of 1,5-2 km, he successfully shot down small missiles, could not succeed at greater distances, and a lot depended on the transparency of the atmosphere. As the military then said, a pair of "Shilok" or "Tungusok" would solve the problem an order of magnitude more efficiently.
                      2. Saburov
                        Saburov 17 December 2015 00: 35 New
                        -2
                        Quote: andj61
                        These are exactly the R&D projects that were carried out in the USA as part of the SDI. And the laser prototype seemed to be created, but there were problems with the application. Due to the ban on the deployment of nuclear weapons in space, a nuclear-pumped X-ray laser was supposed to start from a submarine and, after entering orbit, begin to shoot down our warheads. But with the simultaneous launch with our missiles, the lasers were hopelessly lagging behind, it was necessary to put into the orbit of a nuclear conflict, and this fact itself could already cause a conflict. In addition, very low-cost means — smoke of the launch areas, even small maneuvering in the active section, disruption of the brightness of the engine torch due to chemical additives in the fuel — significantly reduced the effectiveness of the combat use of such a laser. But if, on the active site, burning the tank’s hull is still possible in principle: the geometrical dimensions are large, and this burning is already a task, then burning the warhead’s hull on the passive site is not a trivial task. And the USSR openly declared an answer: we will launch hundreds and hundreds of "empty" missiles, i.e. with "empty" warheads - the USSR could really do this. Try to knock them all down even with real nuclear-pumped X-ray lasers in orbit! So such a missile defense laser was a dead-born idea precisely because of the impossibility of effectively performing missile defense tasks. This is not to mention the fact that it did not come to real tests of such a laser.
                        But against satellites, he could work quite successfully.
                        In order of information - I graduated at 1984 MVTU im. Bauman, but the specialty was not directly related to lasers. After the institute he worked at the Research Institute-4 MO, it was the head institute of the Strategic Missile Forces. Here, when testing our product, I observed the tests of a prototype combat laser. At a range of 1,5-2 km, he successfully shot down small missiles, could not succeed at greater distances, and a lot depended on the transparency of the atmosphere. As the military then said, a pair of "Shilok" or "Tungusok" would solve the problem an order of magnitude more efficiently.

                        You read less science fiction and do not pass it off as truth ... You, in my opinion, re-read a lot of science fiction ... and unscientific. And in this case, it is somehow doubtful that you have finished the baumanka, since you do not take into account elementary laws and principles, or do not even know about them.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
                      4. The comment was deleted.
                    2. Saburov
                      Saburov 17 December 2015 00: 47 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Saburov
                      A nuclear weapon in space, a nuclear-pumped X-ray laser was supposed to start from a submarine and, after entering into orbit, begin to shoot down our warheads.

                      Hear a ringing, but don’t know where it is ... a typical sign of an amateur ...
                      The space X-ray shield project was supervised by the legendary "father" of the American hydrogen bomb, Edward Teller, and was called the Excalibur. Like King Arthur’s sword, he had to strike enemy warheads with precision blows. In a matter of seconds after the start of Soviet nuclear missiles, American missiles launched anti-missiles, opening a peculiar curtain of x-ray lasers in space. Each missile defense station "Excalibur" was about a hundred moving metal rods of x-ray lasers mounted around a nuclear charge. Each rod was combined with a personal target capture and guidance system based on a small telescope. After selecting targets and pointing several rods at each of them, the nuclear charge was detonated, and X-ray laser beams “hit” the missiles. According to calculations, each rod could radiate energy in 5 − 6 kJ over a distance of 100 km.

                      It’s not thick and close. Therefore, having carefully weighed all the pros and cons, the Americans settled on a more modest option: they formed a cylinder from all the rods surrounding the charge, forgetting about hitting many targets with one explosion - they would hit one!

                      26 March 1983 year in an underground mine at a test site in Nevada in the framework of the Cabra program was the first, and so far the only, explosion of an X-ray laser with a nuclear pump power of 30 ct. Of this enormous energy, only the miserable 130 kJ hit the tip of Excalibur. An attack with such a sword would not be so far away, because the beam of radiation diverged significantly: every 10 m by a fraction of a millimeter, and after 100 km by almost a dozen meters.

                      Instead of miraculous weapons, a zilch turned out - in the most ideal case, at least one nuclear missile defense had to be spent on one warhead. And when you consider that many missiles carry several warheads and in addition there are a lot of false targets ... And it is not so easy to disable the target with a laser beam, even an X-ray, because modern warheads can withstand close nuclear explosions. In addition, the moratorium on nuclear tests following the first experiment completely transferred the task of creating nuclear-pumped X-ray lasers to the field of theoretical research. What, admit, we especially do not regret.
                    3. Saburov
                      Saburov 17 December 2015 00: 53 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Saburov
                      In order of information - I graduated at 1984 MVTU im. Bauman, but the specialty was not directly related to lasers. After the institute he worked at the Research Institute-4 MO, it was the head institute of the Strategic Missile Forces. Here, when testing our product, I observed the tests of a prototype combat laser. At a range of 1,5-2 km, he successfully shot down small missiles, could not succeed at greater distances, and a lot depended on the transparency of the atmosphere. As the military then said, a pair of "Shilok" or "Tungusok" would solve the problem an order of magnitude more efficiently.

                      Here, my dear, you generally lie completely. The test results of all laser programs in the USSR-Russia are classified and are a state secret, all that is on the network is general information about projects, ravings of journalists and prayers of lovers and that would know at least information about time and place of the experiment, you need at least OP access (a special folder), I doubt very much that you have it or have ever had it, otherwise you would have simply kept silent about this and knew the responsibility for divulging state secrets.
                    4. andj61
                      andj61 17 December 2015 08: 03 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Saburov
                      the place of the experiment, you need at least OP access (a special folder), I doubt very much that you have it or have ever had it, otherwise you would simply be silent about this and know the responsibility for divulging state secrets.

                      As I understand it, you, in addition to hanging labels, do not know anything else and do not know how. All your “revelations” are a repost from other resources. "Special folder", how come.
                      All in all - Sov. Top secret - and that, as I recall 10 years - that's all !. 10 years after the extreme acquaintance with such documents, I expired 17 years ago, after the described case - almost 20, now everything can be said for a long time, especially since almost nothing was said.
                      At the same time, hanging labels, you did not even bother to argue them.
                      Taking into account your numerous reposts, the desire to humiliate your opponent (who only slightly supplemented you, not at all contradicting the information you provided - it is quite real, and certainly not yours), even not paying attention to his information, I dare to reasonably assume about your extremely low culture - both in education and - especially - in human communication.
                    5. Saburov
                      Saburov 17 December 2015 13: 15 New
                      0
                      Quote: andj61
                      As I understand it, you, in addition to hanging labels, do not know anything else and do not know how. All your “revelations” are a repost from other resources. "Special folder", how come.
                      All in all - Sov. Top secret - and that, as I recall 10 years - that's all !. 10 years after the extreme acquaintance with such documents, I expired 17 years ago, after the described case - almost 20, now everything can be said for a long time, especially since almost nothing was said.
                      At the same time, hanging labels, you did not even bother to argue them.
                      Taking into account your numerous reposts, the desire to humiliate your opponent (who only slightly supplemented you, not at all contradicting the information you provided - it is quite real, and certainly not yours), even not paying attention to his information, I dare to reasonably assume about your extremely low culture - both in education and - especially - in human communication.


                      I explained to you in detail several times why it is impossible to use a laser in combat conditions. Although I happened to graduate from two higher military establishments, even I know better about the physical properties of building a laser, unlike you, who graduated from Baumanka ... that's why I’m still sure that you’re just somewhere, something and how then you are not familiar with this topic at all, but the fact that you have to communicate the obvious with the help of other resources, just talk about your bankruptcy in this matter and besides the bragging that you supposedly had access to the SS document, says that you are a respected Balabol. And I explained in a previous post why. Moreover, you e bother as that justify or argue their nonsense about the combat laser, but simply shifted to the person ... where the facts or evidence? If you speak on business, then do not leave a subject of conversation.
                    6. andj61
                      andj61 17 December 2015 14: 25 New
                      0
                      Greetings Balabol dear! You went over to personalities, and right after I just noted the possibility of the combat use of a laser in space - that’s all. You did not bother to bring any real arguments, but you began to be interested in both education and adequacy. Cultural and polite people do not do this, but they do balabol that will plunge into some kind of resource - and they consider the step (just one step, Karl!) Left and right impossible. And there is no answer to the direct questions - even such elementary ones as about diffraction, and about fluctuation, and about the optical system of the laser. But then the repost about the well-known “Escalibur” is difficult to say in your own words, apparently too - like me - in your words - there is not enough education? bully And the answer is simple - you say in your own words - the inconsistency of the arguments will be immediately visible. Apparently, two higher military education is not enough, it would be necessary to get a third, but it’s already technical. Yes, I rolled, for the first time on this resource I also began to hang up labels ... request Aging, apparently ...
                      And about your rejection of ANY (except for burning optics) combat use of lasers - life indicates that such retrograde then quickly change their beliefs after certain achievements of technological progress. About 25 years have passed since the last developments of the USSR in this area. Both in the USA and in Israel have already surpassed the achievements of the Union - and then we were the first.
                      And in 15-20 years they will succeed in military use as well - and you, of course, will change your beliefs then.
                    7. Saburov
                      Saburov 17 December 2015 15: 03 New
                      -1
                      Quote: andj61
                      You did not bother to bring any real arguments, but you began to be interested in both education and adequacy.


                      I congratulate you, that is, the laws of physics are no longer evidence? I wish you to continue to study like that .... I am sorry for your teacher, if you studied of course.
  • nov_tech.vrn
    nov_tech.vrn 16 December 2015 15: 37 New
    +3
    A pilot using a combat laser will be able to blind the enemy at a much greater frustration than a laser pointer, the main thing is that the nasty one does not wear protective glasses.
  • LVMI1980
    LVMI1980 16 December 2015 15: 47 New
    +3
    so outside the atmosphere and cooling is different
    1. andj61
      andj61 16 December 2015 16: 05 New
      -1
      Quote: LVMI1980
      so outside the atmosphere and cooling is different

      Exactly - cooling at +20 or at -150 - things are still somewhat different.
      1. Vorobey-1
        Vorobey-1 16 December 2015 17: 48 New
        +2
        Quote: andj61
        Quote: LVMI1980
        so outside the atmosphere and cooling is different

        Exactly - cooling at +20 or at -150 - things are still somewhat different.

        what does -150 have to do with it ?! In space, cooling such a thing is generally impossible (at the moment and not only). Thermal power must be given up to something or converted into something (into radiation, for example, light, etc.). In space, as vacuum is known, convection convection is unrealistic, and the conversion of heat into other forms of energy in this case is still a fantasy.
        1. Vorobey-1
          Vorobey-1 16 December 2015 17: 55 New
          +2
          From the same problem: why the nuclear reactor is not being used yet - precisely because of cooling (or rather, its absence), so minds still solve the problem of "cold fusion"
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 16 December 2015 17: 00 New
    0
    for Saburov:
    "So these tales are about shot down missiles and shells" ////

    Here is Thomas the unbeliever ... winked
    We do not deal with bikes. The country is small. Mortar mines just fall on cities.
    Either she was shot down, or not shot down, and she fell on your roof.
    And people see this not at secret training grounds, but with the naked eye and with binoculars over their
    own houses. And a mortar shot, and interception.
    1. Saburov
      Saburov 16 December 2015 19: 49 New
      -1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Here is Thomas the unbeliever ...

      Have you discovered new physical principles or found ways to circumvent them? Sound us please !!! And better keep silent, so at least it will look smarter.
      Quote: voyaka uh
      We do not deal with bikes. The country is small. Mortar mines just fall on cities.
      Either she was shot down, or not shot down, and she fell on your roof.
      And people see this not at secret training grounds, but with the naked eye and with binoculars over their
      own houses. And a mortar shot, and interception.

      I congratulate you, you so blindly and zealously trust your military-industrial complex that you take his word for it without state tests?
      And what you saw ... I think in flight you will not distinguish a plastic blank from a real mine, this video is all smooth and beautiful ... interesting, but what about the volley? In my opinion, it’s cheaper and wiser to introduce agents into the ranks of the enemy than to shoot from a slingshot at flying stones. I already told you that no distinct demonstration firing and tests were carried out, even your Defense Ministry refused to finance the project, and you all believe in a miracle weapon ... no one so far, in any laser combat project, has provided range data , the nature of the target, trajectory, the number of salvos, material, conditions of destruction, weather properties ... so tell us something new.
  • gridasov
    gridasov 16 December 2015 15: 02 New
    +2
    And what's the point that you have stated obvious problems. Decisions are neither Russian nor Amer. Firstly, it is impossible to create an impulse in space so that, with a certain potential, it does not become radial, and not as necessary, linear. Secondly, the laws of motion are unshakable. Therefore, in order to create a stable “BEAM” and maintain linearity in its perturbing vector, it is necessary to take the energy source from the same space structure so that there is no “breakdown” and, in addition, the “spin” of the beam, as a key component of the ability to transmit a linear vector, can be provided only by fundamentally different not just energy sources, but sources of formation of the properties of this energy.
    1. Saburov
      Saburov 16 December 2015 15: 15 New
      +4
      I talked about the inability to use the laser in combat conditions and about the repetition of the path by the Americans, which has already been traveled to the USSR ... that is, they reinvent the wheel, but in fact they are sawing money.
      1. gridasov
        gridasov 16 December 2015 15: 22 New
        -2
        And you don’t think that having worked out all the infrastructural processes and repeating the Russian experience, they will be potentially ready for breakthrough solutions. In any case, everything will be ready to solve issues in a new way. Therefore, those who talk more about cutting money (this is not their concern) are stupid and forget that work is going on.
        1. Sura
          Sura 16 December 2015 15: 41 New
          +1
          Well, let's say they shot down the first plane, with the first impulse, the rest will put a smoke cloud and all the energy of the next rays will go into the smoke, as mentioned above about CHEAP methods of protection.
        2. Saburov
          Saburov 16 December 2015 19: 59 New
          -1
          Quote: gridasov
          And you don’t think that having worked out all the infrastructural processes and repeating the Russian experience, they will be potentially ready for breakthrough solutions. In any case, everything will be ready to solve issues in a new way. Therefore, those who talk more about cutting money (this is not their concern) are stupid and forget that work is going on.

          I don’t think ... as a doctor I tell you, as long as the laws of physics exist.
      2. cap
        cap 16 December 2015 15: 49 New
        +1
        And we grenade them laughing
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 16 December 2015 15: 38 New
    +2
    Quote: Saburov
    Here the physically irresistible diffraction law comes into force, which states that laser radiation always diverges from angle = wavelength / beam diameter. At distances of the order of meters, it can be ignored. What next? If we take specifically a combat infrared laser with a wavelength of 2 μm (THEL combat lasers work at such a length, etc.) and a beam diameter of 1 cm, we get a divergence angle of 0.2 milliradians (this is a very small discrepancy - for example, ordinary laser pointers / rangefinders diverge by 5 milliradians and more). Divergence 0.2 mrad. at a distance of 100 meters it will increase the diameter of the spot from 1 cm to about 3 cm (if anyone else remembers school geometry).

    Hehehehe ... and this is only in the first approximation - in the case of linear optics, when we leave the reaction of the medium to the radiation passing through it outside the brackets.
    But the trouble is that with increasing laser power and beam intensity, it begins to influence the propagation medium more and more. And one has to take into account previously discarded non-linear effects due to insignificance - such as changes in the absorption or refractive index depending on the intensity. Enlightenment, self-focus, etc ...
  • Cube123
    Cube123 16 December 2015 16: 30 New
    +1
    Quote: Saburov
    The main and insurmountable obstacle, the fundamental laws of physics, namely, the shorter the wavelength, the more difficult it is to implement quantum amplification of radiation.

    There is no such law. The law is only that pumping should be carried out by a shorter-wavelength radiation than the working laser radiation. Therefore, X-ray lasers can also be created.
    Quote: Saburov
    If we take specifically a combat infrared laser with a wavelength of 2 μm (THEL combat lasers work at such a length, etc.) and a beam diameter of 1 cm, then we get the angle of divergence 0.2 of the milliradian (this is a very small difference - for example, ordinary laser pointers / rangefinders diverge by 5 milliradians and more).

    You forget about the telescope at the exit. For example, a meter telescope in your case will give a hundred-fold decrease in divergence, and this will increase the power density on the target by a factor of ten to four.

    But all the time they forget that the accuracy of pointing and holding the beam on a moving target should be commensurate with the beam divergence. And here the problems are abruptly divergent. And this limits the capabilities of laser weapons even in space.
    1. Saburov
      Saburov 16 December 2015 20: 02 New
      -2
      Quote: Cube123
      There is no such law. The law is only that pumping should be carried out by a shorter-wavelength radiation than the working laser radiation. Therefore, X-ray lasers can also be created.

      Physically, the law of diffraction, which states that laser radiation always diverges with an angle = wavelength / beam diameter ... with which I congratulate you!
      1. Cube123
        Cube123 17 December 2015 08: 43 New
        +1
        Quote: Saburov
        Quote: Cube123
        There is no such law. The law is only that pumping should be carried out by a shorter-wavelength radiation than the working laser radiation. Therefore, X-ray lasers can also be created.

        Physically, the law of diffraction, which states that laser radiation always diverges with an angle = wavelength / beam diameter ... with which I congratulate you!

        Read carefully what you yourself wrote.
        Quote: Saburov

        The main and insurmountable obstacle, the fundamental laws of physics, namely, the shorter the wavelength, the more difficult it is to implement quantum amplification of radiation.

        Where is the diffraction here?

        And diffraction just means: the shorter the wavelength, the less divergence can be achieved (with the same diameter of the output aperture) and, therefore, a higher energy density on the target.
        1. Saburov
          Saburov 17 December 2015 13: 37 New
          -1
          Quote: Cube123
          Where is the diffraction here?

          And diffraction just means: the shorter the wavelength, the less divergence can be achieved (with the same diameter of the output aperture) and, therefore, a higher energy density on the target.


          Do you reread the course about fluctuation, diffraction and beam divergence? Where did you study dear?
          Absolutely any light beams spatially limited along the transverse (with respect to the propagation direction) coordinates are subject to “transverse spreading” as they propagate. This property of electromagnetic radiation, being completely obvious from the standpoint of both classical electrodynamics and quantum mechanics, is still often considered as a separate phenomenon for a number of historical reasons, and is called light diffraction.
          1. andj61
            andj61 17 December 2015 14: 29 New
            0
            Quote: Saburov
            Do you reread the course about fluctuation, diffraction and beam divergence?

            I'm talking about the fact that you dragged it out of place - that's all. And I can read it to you myself, especially by reposting! wink
            1. Saburov
              Saburov 17 December 2015 15: 00 New
              0
              Quote: andj61

              I'm talking about the fact that you dragged it out of place - that's all. And I can read it to you myself, especially by reposting!

              If you have nothing to say on the case, why do you get into someone else's conversation? Moreover, I have already become convinced enough of your "literacy" of an expert in laser technology based on the scientific report of George Lucas.
              1. Cube123
                Cube123 19 December 2015 10: 23 New
                +1
                In my opinion, you have two problems: you are too aggressive in the forum and write words whose meanings you do not understand. If I can’t do anything with the first smile , to solve the second I can recommend you a book. Where to get - I won’t advise, these are books from a personal library.
              2. Cube123
                Cube123 19 December 2015 10: 25 New
                +1
                Second book.
              3. Cube123
                Cube123 19 December 2015 10: 26 New
                +1
                Third book
              4. Cube123
                Cube123 19 December 2015 10: 27 New
                +1
                Fourth book
              5. Cube123
                Cube123 19 December 2015 10: 28 New
                +1
                Fifth book
              6. Cube123
                Cube123 19 December 2015 10: 29 New
                +1
                Sixth book
              7. Cube123
                Cube123 19 December 2015 10: 31 New
                +1
                Seventh book. Enough for a start. If you want, I can send another hundred or two links.
                1. Saburov
                  Saburov 19 December 2015 21: 49 New
                  0
                  The fact that you have these books does not mean that you read them. Because you just stick your tongue with human language on such trifles as ...

                  Quote: Cube123
                  There is no such law. The law is only that pumping should be carried out by a shorter-wavelength radiation than the working laser radiation. Therefore, X-ray lasers can also be created.
                2. Cube123
                  Cube123 23 December 2015 13: 09 New
                  +1
                  What's wrong here?

                  And I read books not only these smile
                3. Cube123
                  Cube123 23 December 2015 13: 32 New
                  +1
                  http://www.decoder.ru/media/file/0/378.pdf
                  "PHYSICS OF LASERS"

                  Chapter 2.1
                  “Thus, using only two levels, it is impossible to create a population inversion. Therefore, to create a population inversion, it is necessary to select at least three energy levels from the set of various energy levels. Depending on the number of energy levels used in the principle of laser operation, they are called that. For example, three-level, four-level, etc. lasers. "
                  In fig. 2.2 - It is clearly visible - Pumping is carried out by a higher-energy radiation than radiation of generation. Higher energy radiation has a shorter wavelength.

                  Does this somehow contradict what I wrote above?
  • Sober
    Sober 16 December 2015 15: 24 New
    +1
    Yes, this problem has long been solved by engineer Garin!
    Quote: Ami du peuple
    the main problem is energy, have the Americans already decided, since they are concerned about cooling?
  • Tor5
    Tor5 16 December 2015 15: 11 New
    +3
    "Saw, Shura, saw!" (I. Ilf, E. Petrov).
  • vodolaz
    vodolaz 16 December 2015 15: 23 New
    +1
    Yes, yes, I remember the laser test on board the Boeing, with which they shot down a rocket. Only the rocket was black and its flight path was known.
  • Simple
    Simple 16 December 2015 15: 42 New
    +2
    You are up to the "cut" of the US budget.
    Rejoice need, so it will be easier to wash.
  • Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 16 December 2015 14: 30 New
    +5
    The problem of heat dissipation is relevant in many areas. Does the USA have star wars again?
    1. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 16 December 2015 14: 34 New
      +7
      Quote: Dimon19661
      The problem of heat removal is relevant in many areas.Does the US have star wars again?

      They would have to take away excess heat from their heads in America ... You look, it would be easier ...
      1. yuriy55
        yuriy55 16 December 2015 14: 40 New
        +2
        They would have in America to take away excess heat from their heads ... You look, it would be easier ...


        Suvorov was not in their history and no one taught how to. After all A.V. Suvorov used to say this: "Keep your feet warm, your stomach hungry, and your head cold"
      2. Amurets
        Amurets 16 December 2015 14: 46 New
        +1
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        They would have in America to take away excess heat from their heads ... You look, it would be easier ...

        Well, you can use liquid nitrogen to cool the brain.
        1. cap
          cap 16 December 2015 15: 51 New
          +1
          About ice in a towel forgot laughing
  • Teberii
    Teberii 16 December 2015 14: 31 New
    +3
    The problem is not only in cooling, but most importantly in energy consumption per shot.
  • gridasov
    gridasov 16 December 2015 14: 37 New
    +3
    It is like trying to cover yourself with a holey blanket. Multistage is already, in itself, introduces a destructive effect in that the quality factor of the entire system decreases. You could even say that the developers are in a "panic and grab at the straw." Decisions nonetheless consist in new approaches to the analysis of processes and their solutions.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 16 December 2015 15: 34 New
      +1
      Quote: gridasov
      Multistage is already, in itself, introduces a destructive effect in that the quality factor of the entire system decreases. You could even say that the developers are in a "panic and grab at the straw."

      There is still worth mentioning the exorbitant craving of American engineers to complicate the design - either they just think that the more technically difficult, the better, or really - everything is done not to achieve maximum efficiency and specified characteristics, but to achieve the maximum final cost of the product .. .
      1. gridasov
        gridasov 16 December 2015 15: 40 New
        0
        This wisdom comes from antiquity, that expanding your knowledge in diversity, on THIS you need to approach the depth of truths, which means simplicity and optimality. Therefore, their flaws are obvious.
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 16 December 2015 15: 47 New
          +1
          It would be easier for you to express yourself a little, otherwise such a fascination with specific terms (and obviously superfluous) aggravates the perception of the text you wrote, although its meaning is absolutely correct. Therefore, do not make the same mistakes as the Americans - do not overly complicate everything))))
          1. gridasov
            gridasov 16 December 2015 15: 56 New
            0
            And what words and terms still need to be applied? The main thing is to be understood by those who are capable of it. This is a test in order not to come into contact with amateurs and extras. You always want to talk to smart people and learn something. Jokers so oversupply. Only when the "cancer on the mountain begins to whistle" do they become cannon fodder. The air is already saturated with gunpowder.
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 16 December 2015 16: 08 New
              +1
              Quote: gridasov
              And what words and terms still need to be applied?

              Which you just applied in the quoted comment))))). Just as I watched the comments, I noticed that often your comments, no offense, are too vitiate and overloaded with terminology that is not related to the subject, which makes it difficult to understand, although you write, you are certainly the right thing.
              1. gridasov
                gridasov 16 December 2015 16: 16 New
                +1
                You can’t but agree! However ! To understand some issues and ways to solve them, you need to have a certain mindset and the ability to reason. Moreover, to be close to the subject and subtleties of the issue under discussion. Therefore, for me personally, participation in such forums is only an opportunity to get in touch with those who need our knowledge. But what if !?
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 16 December 2015 16: 34 New
                  0
                  Quote: gridasov
                  To understand some issues and ways to solve them, you need to have a certain mindset and the ability to reason.

                  This is certainly true.
                  Quote: gridasov
                  Therefore, for me personally, participation in such forums is only an opportunity to get in touch with those who need our knowledge.

                  So the fact of the matter is that those who are not very aware of some, say, technical aspects, should try to explain everything more simply than in discussions with specialists))))
    2. Felix2
      Felix2 17 December 2015 10: 33 New
      0
      I do not see any panic. Everything new has its difficulties, and as we see them gradually, they overcome them step by step. As I recall a year and a half ago, the same discussions were held about the power plant, and that, for today, this topic is already closed.
      1. Albert1988
        Albert1988 17 December 2015 10: 53 New
        0
        Quote: Felix2
        As I recall a year and a half ago, the same discussions were held about the power plant, and that, for today, this topic is already closed.

        The fact of the matter is that it is completely incomprehensible from what to feed the "burning" laser. which is supposed to shoot down planes, the most that a laser can do now is to blind (enemy optics, homing head, etc.) - there’s simply not enough power for more.
        As for the article, here, as I said correctly voyaka uh, it smells like an attempt to "build a plane around the laser" (because it’s hardly possible to use such a scheme on modern machines already available). But they will not build a plane around a weak blinding installation? But there is no powerful laser, namely a burning enemy, precisely because of the lack of an adequate power source.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 16 December 2015 14: 37 New
    +3
    Surprisingly different, as you had not guessed before ...
    1. Decathlon
      Decathlon 16 December 2015 14: 42 New
      +3
      Apparently, the “F-35 Program” used to feed, money has, perhaps, one negative property: they someday end ...
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 16 December 2015 16: 14 New
        +1
        If without jokes, then it is clear why. They used to be
        tried to mount the laser on a finished plane,
        and now we have come to the logical conclusion that it is necessary
        to build a plane "around the laser" - integrating the engine
        aircraft into the laser cooling system.

        About how the A-10 attack aircraft was built around
        huge rapid-fire gun.
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 16 December 2015 16: 37 New
          +1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          and now we have come to the logical conclusion that it is necessary
          build a plane "around the laser"

          The only question that remains is what is to be built around, is it or not? As far as we know, now in nature there are no such lasers that would be effective at long distances and, in principle, could be mounted on an airplane (namely, a fighter).
          That is, it turns out that they will build their plane around a gun, which exists only hypothetically?
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 16 December 2015 16: 46 New
            0
            "As far as we know, now in nature there are no such lasers that
            would be effective over long distances "////

            You are a little behind life, such lasers already exist.
            (In the last year there were a dozen publications at VO, no less)
            But so far they have not been able to adapt them to planes.
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 16 December 2015 16: 54 New
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              But so far they have not been able to adapt them to planes.

              That's right - because the size of the installation-emitter itself, although not large, but the power supply there is the size of a truck, and sometimes even two, so if such a bandura is shoved on a plane, then only on a transporter or on a heavy bomber (and, he will gobble up all the payload there), but not to the fighter, where they are trying to add it all.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 16 December 2015 17: 12 New
                +1
                You are right, powerful "burning lasers" are beginning to be installed so far on only large aircraft.
                But even on a small F-35 plan to build a "blinding" laser. Against attacking missiles
                SAM and air-to-air, and enemy aircraft instruments.
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 16 December 2015 18: 54 New
                  0
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  "blinding" laser.

                  The truth is interesting, how do they realize this - will they install two dozen emitters throughout the body?
                  And still the question remains - why build a plane around the laser nowif at the moment there are no adequate lasers? And if you build a huge Boeing - then why use it?
                  And about poor F-35, he is already bursting from the load, so they still want to cram something ...
                  No matter how the next terribly expensive but unviable wunderwafl ...
  • newcomer
    newcomer 16 December 2015 14: 46 New
    +6
    the circus left, the clowns remained. the Yankees are bored without an artist's reagan.
  • dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 16 December 2015 14: 48 New
    +3
    Air conditioning on the fuselage hang from all sides and that's it! wassat
  • spech
    spech 16 December 2015 14: 49 New
    +3
    Research has not yet been completed and experts have not come to a final conclusion - how heat will be removed from the lasers.

    It's simple, give me the money!
  • Denis DV
    Denis DV 16 December 2015 14: 53 New
    +1
    Fool no believe in this nonsense bully
  • todaygoodday
    todaygoodday 16 December 2015 15: 02 New
    +1
    Once upon a time about nuclear weapons, or rather about weapons of such an opportunity could only dream of. And such people were called visionaries. But time passed and it appeared. We see the same now. Another issue with current technology is whether this is achievable. God forbid that now it would be impossible.
    1. gridasov
      gridasov 16 December 2015 15: 08 New
      -2
      Absolutely right! Fundamental discoveries are either a gradient of either the need to balance forces in opposed communities of people, or to push the entire community of people into a movement in development. But it is always a "spoon for a served dinner."
  • Stinger
    Stinger 16 December 2015 15: 14 New
    +1
    Eggheads extract dollars from dumbhead wallets. As long as they guess where in the laser it took so much heat that there is no way to take it off, the wallet will be empty.
  • cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 16 December 2015 15: 15 New
    +1
    Damn, again rave pnd = remnants of the cosmic wars. As the saying goes: - "richer by thought".
  • TұrKBөrӨ
    TұrKBөrӨ 16 December 2015 15: 16 New
    0
    Probably, when the works of J. Verne also caused "laughter and delight" of his contemporaries.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 16 December 2015 15: 38 New
      +2
      Quote: ТұрКБөрӨ
      Probably, when the works of J. Verne also caused "laughter and delight" of his contemporaries.

      And you would try in the time of Jules Verne to build a submarine with the characteristics that he described in “Twenty thousand leagues ...” - you were definitely laughed at.
      Hedgehog it is clear that having a powerful source of energy and an extremely efficient source of radiation can theoretically build a powerful combat laser, BUT! Now there is neither one nor the other, and American designers are trying in this case to solve secondary problems when the basic ones are not yet solved, which gives rise to some suspicions about them ...
      1. TұrKBөrӨ
        TұrKBөrӨ 16 December 2015 21: 16 New
        0
        And Moscow was not built right away. The evolution of weapons, if you will, will inevitably be created.
  • Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 16 December 2015 15: 16 New
    +1
    The stubborn ones are all fumbling with laser weapons - moreover, not to blind optics, which is possible; but for the destruction of objects; moreover, in the atmosphere, and not in space. In my opinion, they saw the budget mostly.
  • f.lourens
    f.lourens 16 December 2015 15: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: dchegrinec
    Air conditioning on the fuselage hang from all sides and that's it! wassat

    No air conditioning request suddenly explode ... we already saw this wassat
  • SHOCK.
    SHOCK. 16 December 2015 15: 28 New
    +1
    An inadequate answer is always cheaper and more efficient. Let them break their heads, the time will come, they will also break their neck.
  • Mark68
    Mark68 16 December 2015 15: 30 New
    +1
    If only our military wouldn’t be fooled and would not cut people's money for the invention, and then the production of mirror (such as laser-reflecting) aircraft and tanks.
  • bad
    bad 16 December 2015 15: 33 New
    +1
    Quote: Zoldat_A
    Quote: Dimon19661
    The problem of heat removal is relevant in many areas.Does the US have star wars again?

    They would have to take away excess heat from their heads in America ... You look, it would be easier ...
    ..heh .. maybe it is not necessary to take heat away from the head? .. judging by the policy of the mattress, they do not overheat the head .. and think not with the head but with the ass laughing and they only eat in the head .. laughing
  • newcomer
    newcomer 16 December 2015 15: 45 New
    +4
    we (as far as I remember from the Internet and “shock force“), ready-made pulse cannon. it is no worse than laser, most importantly cheaper. and about the laser gun, we were not far behind the Yankees. if necessary, get the old drawings and modify. the key here is _ if necessary (regarding public money). I encourage cheerleaders.
  • Riv
    Riv 16 December 2015 15: 48 New
    +1
    Shit question. I solved this problem in five seconds. It is necessary to dip the plane into the water - the laser will immediately cool.
  • jungler
    jungler 16 December 2015 16: 44 New
    +1
    Hmm .. maybe I also need to insert my 5 kopecks into this scientific debate ?? We discussed wave optics (although there is no clarity in it at a fundamental level). But no one has canceled the thermodynamics yet. The 3 issue is not fundamentally resolved. 1. WHERE to take an agromed amount of energy (from whom to take, what to burn, where to extract ... etc ..) 2. WHERE to put unspent heat. (Even in water there are problems, and even in the air and / or even more so in space ....?. 3 How to increase the laser efficiency well, at least to 90% That is, in principle, the task of building a powerful laser is similar to creating a photon engine. Conclusion I DO NOT BELIEVE in the creation of this device. There are no fundamental prerequisites .... Stanislavsky
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 16 December 2015 16: 53 New
    0
    The technique does not stand still. Self-defense lasers have not been new for a long time, now they are solving issues of increasing efficiency and over time, the characteristics will only grow. Those who are sure that these are all toys, then they will catch up with blood from the nose. Like what happened to drones.
  • Sealek
    Sealek 16 December 2015 16: 57 New
    0
    Does the note say something about hitting a target with a "laser beam"? At the ISS, we conducted an experiment on the transmission of electric energy through a laser beam. On laser cooling - did not understand what the "fundamental novelty" is? Who can explain what necessitates the development of an “adaptive engine” for cooling the coolant - if it is possible to place the heat exchanger in an additional channel for supplying air to the engine’s output stream due to the ejection effect?
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 16 December 2015 17: 06 New
    +1
    Here Russia is also in the subject:

    "So far, the United States and China continue to not even develop, but actively test and implement combat lasers,
    in Russia decided to shake antiquity - to return to the development, the beginning of which was laid
    back in the first half of the 1970s. "////
    "The fact that the project [" Skiff "] is finally unfrozen, the general public first heard in 2009.
    Then a series of successful tests was announced. "////
  • mag nit
    mag nit 16 December 2015 18: 02 New
    0
    Air conditioning is needed however ...
  • ML-334
    ML-334 16 December 2015 19: 05 New
    0
    The perfect projectile is ball lightning! Your opinion gentlemen.
  • _GSVG_
    _GSVG_ 16 December 2015 22: 59 New
    0
    Particularly pleasing is the desire to additionally throw up thermal energy on the fighter’s engine, and it also produces little heat and removes heat, so it’s necessary to glow brighter in general. laughing