Military Review

Media: British company "Raytheon" is developing a combat laser

74
UK continues to follow the path of developing a laser weapons. This is reported by the portal. Defense News. In particular, we are talking about the laser facility, which the company creates Raytheonstructurally part of the union Babcock International Group. With this association about 4 years ago, the main military department of Britain entered into a contract worth 1,5 billion pounds to develop a new generation of nuclear submarines. Now the Ministry of Defense of the United Kingdom is considering the conclusion of a contract for the purchase of laser systems.


First of all, we are talking about deck-based installations. In the field of creating laser weapons, it is reported that Britain intends to compete with the United States and Germany, where similar developments are also under way.

Official representative of the company Raytheon stated:
The first shot of the company created laser weapons is expected in 2018 year.


Recall that a similar announcement was made by British Admiral George Zambellas last year.

Announced the first test of the laser system Raytheon on the land. If the tests are deemed successful, the combat laser will be delivered to the deck of the British Navy ship for marine testing.

Media: British company "Raytheon" is developing a combat laser


В Babcock International Group declare that the laser installation of slightly reduced dimensions and power can be installed, for example, on army trucks. According to the representative of the production association, such an option could be useful, for example, in Iraq to protect British bases. At the same time, there is no precise information about the power of the combat laser under development.
Photos used:
Press Service of the British Navy
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. g1v2
    g1v2 26 May 2016 13: 14
    +16
    Gazprom has, for example, a laser system, if I do not confuse it, on the tank chassis. He made an order for them - to extinguish fires at the drilling sites. From a distance of 100 m, it cuts metal with a thickness of 100 mm even in smokey conditions. request There is little use for modern laser lasers in such a short range - a missile for any long-range one. But that’s what will be years through 10 - xs. Maybe laser rifles will start to do. Well, it’s so cool - the Pentagon does not have a laser tank, but Gazprom has it. fellow
    1. potroshenko
      potroshenko 26 May 2016 13: 31
      0
      Yes, they’ll say right now that they have cut at Britons, etc.
      1. godofwar6699
        godofwar6699 26 May 2016 15: 29
        +2
        Raytheon - an American company
        USA: Waltham, Massachusetts
    2. Hort
      Hort 26 May 2016 15: 14
      +3
      as soon as they come up with a portable power source, rifles and guns will appear
      1. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 26 May 2016 16: 40
        0
        Already there is a long time ago, the Americans planned to use it as a battery of the prosthesis’s heart valve, but lithium batteries didn’t grow together, we also had similar developments, but we are always very secretive, 25 years ago my teacher told me about such things work commissioned by the Ministry of Defense of the USSR.
        1. Hort
          Hort 27 May 2016 16: 23
          0
          and how long will it last?
    3. Alex_Rarog
      Alex_Rarog 26 May 2016 17: 03
      +1
      Sorry, but there is not a tank, but two trucks, one generator is the second one directly installed!
      1. Saburov
        Saburov 26 May 2016 18: 23
        +12
        Quote: Alex_Rarog
        as soon as they come up with a portable power source, rifles and guns will appear


        Even if they find, then the laws of physics still can not get around. First - No matter how you try, the beam alas will diverge. The physical law of diffraction states that laser radiation always diverges from 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. Secondly - Power criterion. The most powerful laser today is the ABL chemical COIL laser. Its power is about 1 megawatts. For comparison: the power of the 76-mm division gun F-22 of the 1936 model of the year is about 150 megawatts. 150 times more! Count yourself - the kinetic energy of the projectile (M * V ^ 2) / 2 divided by the time it is reached (about 0.01 seconds). We still do not take into account the explosive energy in the projectile itself. There are still as many. Think about this simple fact: a small ancient cannon from the time of the Second World War at a price of scrap metal is hundreds of times more powerful than an ultramodern “battle” laser weighing tens of tons and costing over 5 billions of dollars. And thirdly - As you know, the usual laser operation scheme provides for “pumping” a 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, it will mostly 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 the target, we can easily vaporize our own laser. 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.

        PS Therefore, it is easy to understand that the distance of hitting a target even in 1 km, for example, for an 100-kW laser is an unattainable dream in real conditions. Unless you understand, for example, a canister of gasoline. Or a naked man tied to a tree. That is, a minimally protected target cannot be hit with such a laser at REASONABLE distances in combat conditions.
        1. Hort
          Hort 27 May 2016 16: 22
          0
          Well here it is clear that the laser power should already be megawatt))
          Although even a megawatt and with a portable nuclear installation, one bolt will not beat more than a kilometer.
          Again, with an increase in power, the question arises of heat-resistant lens materials
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Nforce
      Nforce 26 May 2016 20: 35
      0
      And Gazprom also has a black hole into which huge bundles of $ from the Russian budget are sucked.
  2. pavelty
    pavelty 26 May 2016 13: 15
    +2
    I'm weak in lasers, of course, but the power supply on the truck for example? Batteries?
    1. weksha50
      weksha50 26 May 2016 13: 43
      +3
      Quote: pavlentiy
      I'm weak in lasers, of course, but the power supply on the truck for example? Batteries?



      That's the whole problem of combat lasers, in powerful and compact power supplies ...

      So far no one (including us) has made a breakthrough in this direction, it is too early to talk about the effectiveness of the use of combat lasers ...
      1. Stalker.1977
        Stalker.1977 26 May 2016 14: 16
        +1
        Yes diesel generator and cistern salary on the trailer)))
      2. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 26 May 2016 16: 43
        0
        Current, if the laser is portable, there are no problems with the machine, KamAZ is enough in size; there are problems in another; it’s difficult to solve, for example, scattering a beam at long distances and power loss is already good and the protection from them is not bad and it will be even better.
    2. potroshenko
      potroshenko 26 May 2016 13: 44
      0
      On a warship
      1. andranick
        andranick 26 May 2016 13: 52
        +1
        and he doesn’t need it there
        The personal wearable option for short distances is much more interesting, but there is no corresponding personal and wearable energy source.
      2. GSVG 86-88
        GSVG 86-88 26 May 2016 14: 34
        +2
        On the ship, it is unlikely that the stabilization system needs an ideal one.
        1. Dam
          Dam 26 May 2016 15: 23
          +3
          Yeah, and another perfectly transparent atmosphere and preferably a fixed target
  3. andranick
    andranick 26 May 2016 13: 16
    +2
    Media: British company "Raytheon" is developing a combat laser
    Oh damn, just noticed! Estonians nervously smoke on the sidelines with Finns ... laughing
  4. salad
    salad 26 May 2016 13: 19
    +2
    Some railguns do)) and these super BLASTERS))))))))))
    1. andranick
      andranick 26 May 2016 13: 31
      +5
      Railgun is a real alternative to laser. But unlike a laser, it does not depend on weather conditions (though I don’t know how its projectile at a speed of 1700 m / s will behave in a snowstorm and rainfall). In addition, it can be applied on the surface at fairly large distances, here the laser is resting. And rockets / drones and ballistic targets flying at a distance of several hundred meters to units of kilometers along a stable trajectory (like on laser demos) are not a question for him.
      Cons are similar to a laser: low combat rate of fire.
      So unlike the laser, the railgun sees at least some kind of combat use.
      1. andranick
        andranick 26 May 2016 13: 38
        +1
        In addition, there is also a minus for us: potential "friends" will be able to gain real experience of using the railgun and draw conclusions on the further development or futility of such systems (or maybe something new). We do not have such experience and is not expected, laboratory work does not count.
        1. Captain green
          Captain green 26 May 2016 15: 20
          0
          As far as I remember, the site had material about work on the manhole. weapons based on the Black Sea Fleet ...
        2. tilovaykrisa
          tilovaykrisa 26 May 2016 16: 47
          0
          Intelligence will work as in the case of the Manhattan project.
      2. Dam
        Dam 26 May 2016 15: 32
        +1
        Yeah, have you already made the barrel for the railgun? Or invented material that does not deform at such a speed? So, while it’s just a blizzard, and how he behaves, Quake knows him.
        1. tilovaykrisa
          tilovaykrisa 26 May 2016 16: 49
          -1
          There, the barrel is a conventional shell, but the disc does not have direct contact with the barrel; there, the field plays the role of the barrel.
          1. andranick
            andranick 26 May 2016 16: 51
            -1
            And where are the RAILS ?! Indeed, the RELSotron is there! belay
          2. quote
            quote 26 May 2016 18: 04
            +1
            Quote: tilovaykrisa
            There, the barrel is a conventional shell, but the disc does not have direct contact with the barrel; there, the field plays the role of the barrel.


            We read.
            The railgun consists of two parallel electrodes, called rails, connected to a source of powerful direct current. Overclocked conductive mass is located between the rails, closing the electrical circuit, and acquires acceleration due to the Lorentz force acting on a closed conductor with a current in its own magnetic field
            And the rails are burning "bless you"!
      3. tilovaykrisa
        tilovaykrisa 26 May 2016 16: 46
        0
        A compact railgun on a box of things dangerous technology will break in 10 years later.
        1. Dam
          Dam 27 May 2016 00: 58
          0
          I kindly hinted, and now I’ll say straight: shkolota scat, learn physics and the Russian language, the ship it is written through
  5. ohtsistem
    ohtsistem 26 May 2016 13: 21
    +4
    It’s kind of strange .... mass throws started on the latest developments in the West ... as it seems to them they take us to fright, but the enemies are afraid themselves and it pleases good
    Much can turn out to be a fiction in order to exert certain pressure and untwist the flywheel of the race.
  6. abc_alex
    abc_alex 26 May 2016 13: 27
    +4
    Quote: ohtsistem
    It’s kind of strange .... mass throws started on the latest developments in the West ... as it seems to them they take us to fright, but the enemies are afraid themselves and it pleases


    What's the latest in laser weapons? This topic has been practiced almost since the 60s. And everyone has long known its pros and cons. And also everyone knows the insurmountable restrictions on the use of lasers. As well as means of dealing with them.
    1. ohtsistem
      ohtsistem 26 May 2016 13: 28
      +1
      One thing is known ... another is already in action hi
  7. mpzss
    mpzss 26 May 2016 13: 30
    0
    Quote: g1v2
    Gazprom has, for example, a laser system, if I do not confuse it, on the tank chassis. He made an order for them - to extinguish fires at the drilling sites. From a distance of 100 m, it cuts metal with a thickness of 100 mm even in smokey conditions. request There is little use for modern laser lasers in such a short range - a missile for any long-range one. But that’s what will be years through 10 - xs. Maybe laser rifles will start to do. Well, it’s so cool - the Pentagon does not have a laser tank, but Gazprom has it. fellow

    here is the link http://topwar.ru/39288-mobilnye-lazernye-tehnologicheskie-kompleksy-razrabotki-g
    nc-rf-triniti.html
    So you say that Gaprom has, but no pentagon? And the answer to the surface, Prostogazprom thinks about its personal initiatives, possible losses from fires, etc. and the Pentagon just won’t give the money, just look what they have with F-35 and everything will fall into place, just cut green paper, but there’s no point.
  8. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 26 May 2016 13: 31
    +4
    Laser weapons have a power limitation due to the presence of the atmosphere. This is laser air breakdown. At a certain power density, plasma is formed, and the beam "does not go" further. The second problem is beam divergence; the farther away the target, the more power is required to get the desired power density on the target. And here limitation number one rises to its full height.
    The third problem is targeting. You have to hold a fast-flying target with the help of some kind of optical system, and tremendous power is transmitted in it.
    Well, another problem is DUST. With such power, any speck of dust on the surface of the optics explodes like a microgarnet and PORTS this optics.
    Well, the last. Smoke, dust, fog over the battlefield - the laser is helpless. The military gentlemen studied poorly at school.
    1. andranick
      andranick 26 May 2016 13: 42
      0
      Mountain shooter, everything is true, but the third restriction is overcome with the introduction of a milder restriction on the sector of retention of the target.
      Well, the last. Smoke, dust, fog over the battlefield - the laser is helpless
      The restriction is lifted if the target's parameters allow the beam to penetrate to it at the speed of sound, that is, the target must be static (Ay-ya-yi, where are such targets on the battlefield ?!).
      So, while the laser has no prospects other than incapacitating optoelectronic devices and enemy manpower.
    2. Fidget
      Fidget 26 May 2016 13: 55
      0
      in short, only in the vacuum of space is the real use of the laser ...
      but so far we only have the name of the VKS pulls on "star wars" =)
      and the partners don’t have that either =)))
      1. Red_Hamer
        Red_Hamer 26 May 2016 18: 47
        0
        The brainchild of the USSR A-60. Developments to improve these systems, and the like, have not been canceled here. That is, they were conducted all these years, no matter what. When necessary, demonstrate.
    3. CAMS
      CAMS 26 May 2016 13: 57
      +1
      Hollywood rules Western scholars, that’s the whole answer. We didn’t have Hollywood from here and pragmatism
    4. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 26 May 2016 15: 42
      +2
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      The military gentlemen studied poorly at school.
      The question is incorrect.
      The military are expressing "Wishlist" and are customers who pay for the completed order.
      And the performers and sculptors are scientists, designers, engineers and technicians who "studied well at school", the university, with academic degrees hung like Bobik with fleas.
      So, "call: banana nema!"
    5. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 May 2016 15: 49
      0
      "The military gentlemen studied poorly at school" ////

      What does the military have to do with it? Physicists gather before any such R&D,
      who fundamentally evaluate the possibility of creating weapons.
      If they say "no" no one will invest a dollar in the project.

      You - seriously - think you understand physics better than
      Scientists from the USA, Germany. Israel, England, which
      gave the go-ahead to the production of combat laser systems? smile
      1. Parsec
        Parsec 26 May 2016 19: 17
        0
        Well, if Israel fits into this, then surely!

        The concept of a combat laser must be clearly defined by purpose. Otherwise, you come to the concept of faith, but not knowledge.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 26 May 2016 22: 28
          -1

          The concept of a Combat laser must be clearly defined by its targets "/////

          Our goals are slightly different.
          Israel is important to bring down mortar mines in flight, the Americans and the British
          concerned about the marine near air defense, the Germans - the protection of armored vehicles from low-flying
          goals. But the implementation is about the same: a large beam laser
          laser beams converging together at a given point. Such a solution overcomes
          all 4 "unsolvable physics" (from the point of view of the respected Mountain Shooter) problems together.
          1. Parsec
            Parsec 26 May 2016 23: 36
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Israel is important to bring down mortar mines in flight


            A secondary trained mortar crew easily hangs 16 mm 82 mm into the air, a platoon, respectively, 64 mines. Even if we assume that a tool has been found that allows to hit a 60 mm mine, not 82 mm, but even 82, this is what a control system should be in order to work out for 64 targets at a time interval of ten seconds, especially a beam of rays. Mines are made in a cast-iron casing with a thickness of a dozen millimeters, so what kind of energy should be there, burn-melt a centimeter of cast iron, but moving in space in a compressible medium and swinging on a trajectory. But to reduce the beams with an accuracy of millimeters, otherwise the spot will defocus? Phenomena in laser beams do not always strongly increase the energy of the target.
            Well, we are waiting for retribution by faith.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 27 May 2016 02: 22
              +2
              I can’t say about 16 minutes in a row whether the laser has time to burn them all,
              and one mine - yes, it knocks me down confidently. Moreover, a very frail laser prototype.
              We are not engaged in theory - mines fly from Gaza to border villages,
              they must be shot down. It’s not always possible to detect and destroy a crew - they’ll fire
              from dense city building. The Iron Dome does not have time at distances of up to 7 km
              to intercept, and the laser (with the same FCS from the LCD) - in time.
              Moreover - the laser knocks down and the artillery shell is thicker and flying much faster,
              than a mortar mine.

              "Well, we are waiting for reward by faith." ////
              Well, and you success in further upgrades of the Kalashnikov assault rifle! smile
              1. Parsec
                Parsec 27 May 2016 14: 20
                +2
                Well, yes, yes ... Miracle, mystery and authority, the foundation of all religions.

                and SLA from the Iron Dome.

                It meant the combat use of a laser to disable infrared, photocontrast and television homing heads on weapons, damage to the human retina and optical devices - sights, armored vehicle periscopes, etc. And here again a thick-walled cast-iron projectile is burned on the fly, with a very feeble laser, a prototype. And why? And because "we are not engaged in theory - mines come from Gaza." Association with an old anecdote - how many eggs does a producer ram have in your kibbutz? Up to five, but this is on weak farms.
                The OMS from the Dome ... is a thinker, and inside he has a neonka (s).

                Then it’s even more interesting - and with TNT, which is flooded in a mine, what will happen?

                Did you find out about the defeat of mines in the same way as about the defeat of the box office, lying on the street on your back during a raid?

                You can see the remnants of Soviet education, well, take care, calculate the required energy to melt 10 mm of gray cast iron in a spot, okay, 10 mm in diameter (this is the seventh grade of high school), then recalculate it into the required laser power. It will be a revelation for you that the laser beam does not hit a spot of 5 mm on a stationary object every time, it walks on a stationary object and crumbles, and even on a moving one! Physics of wave phenomena. Everyone has. Although what I mean, you are not involved in theory, you have mines flying.
                What kind of drive, with what dynamic qualities, a flying mine will be tracked to the accuracy of angular seconds, what kind of platform is needed for it, so that from a tractor that has passed a hundred meters away your beam is not visible throughout Israel!

                And with a Kalashnikov assault rifle, everything is fine.
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 27 May 2016 15: 13
                  -1
                  "And with the Kalashnikov assault rifle everything is fine" /////

                  I had no doubt!

                  And not only we are engaged in combat lasers: Boeing, Kraus, Reiseon, others
                  large gunsmiths. And not to "blind the optics".
                  And they all have "remnants of Soviet education."
                  But if a chorus of physics boys sings that "a battle laser is not possible"
                  because, Soviet scientists in the 70s decided so .... no so no smile
                  1. Parsec
                    Parsec 27 May 2016 19: 54
                    0
                    Raytheon, not Raiseon.

                    The development paths of science are inscrutable. Maybe they will discover some new types of energy, maybe they will learn how to channel this energy.

                    But now, after twenty years of research, the Boeing has curtailed work on a combat laser to destroy air targets.

                    Every five years, Reiteon reports successful applications, then a 60 mm mine at a distance of 1 km, then Avenger with a laser channel, but there are no samples.

                    Engaged - success. When there is something real, write in VO.
                    But not before.
                    1. voyaka uh
                      voyaka uh 27 May 2016 22: 23
                      0
                      I survived. Soloists from the choir of physics boys
                      English is being taught to me ... Raytheon. How to pronounce
                      th combination in english? smile
                      1. Parsec
                        Parsec 27 May 2016 22: 57
                        +1
                        Are you replacing the absence of arguments with such primitives?

                        Portuguese call their capital Lisboa, it sounds like Lizhboa, but everywhere it is written in Russian as Lisbon; and Hudson Bay is called Hudson Bay and sounds like Hudson, but we write like this; and it’s only useful to correct the Englishman in the text of Moscow on Moskwa.

                        You are now trying to correct me the name of the company, which is always written in Russian-language documents Reiteon.

                        Got it, get it, you probably speak English? It really hurts, and it was your "survivor" with grabbing your hair, no?
                      2. Parsec
                        Parsec 27 May 2016 23: 06
                        +1
                        Raytheon is pronounced by native speakers of Reytian.

                        But it’s good that you remember the rules of fifth grade.
                      3. Parsec
                        Parsec 27 May 2016 23: 09
                        0
                        To read "and only durr to climb to correct the Englishman in the text of Moscow on Moskwa
                    2. Parsec
                      Parsec 27 May 2016 23: 12
                      0
                      Probably should be taught.

                      The Americans themselves pronounce Reytian.
          2. andranick
            andranick 27 May 2016 06: 44
            0
            About a year ago, I asked the same question: Will the miracle of Israeli engineering overpower mortar shells (or rather a platoon) overpower the miracle. :) An interesting such calculation is obtained: The cost of a laser installation VS the cost of several minutes. And the fact that an immediate fire will be opened on the laser to defeat - I have no doubt, because it’s not necessary to shoot down a polite humanitarian aid :)
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 27 May 2016 22: 59
              -1
              Israeli Iron beam (Rafael) until the volley is mastered, learned to shoot down only single mines
              and shells. A volley needs several installations that distribute targets.
              The American naval LaWS (Kratos defense) installed on Ponce also knows how to destroy only single targets.
              1. Parsec
                Parsec 27 May 2016 23: 35
                0
                LaWS uses a solid-state infrared laser with an adjustable level of "shot energy". A 30 kW installation should be sufficient for defense against unmanned aerial vehicles or boats directly attacking a ship. There are several modes (shot energy levels), both for blinding control systems and for causing physical damage to attackers.

                Voooot. UAV and rubber boat. Blinding systems. Retinal burning by an attacker.
                Nobody burns a mine?
  • Lumumba
    Lumumba 26 May 2016 13: 37
    +1
    According to Gazprom's Laser Tank:

    http://www.triniti.ru/Mltc50.html
    http://www.popmech.ru/technologies/8832-lazernyy-giperboloid-superoruzhie-gazpro
    ma / # full
  • Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 26 May 2016 13: 38
    +1
    Science fiction and cinema have done their job. Cutting this issue is their business, but you can’t go anywhere against the laws of thermodynamics. It takes a lot of power to heat the air and burn the enemy. This is the problem.
    1. potroshenko
      potroshenko 26 May 2016 13: 44
      +1
      What is the problem on the warship to place the required power?
      1. andranick
        andranick 26 May 2016 13: 52
        +2
        No problems. Of the latest innovations - Zumvolt an example, the power has nowhere to go. Obviously, the problem is not power.
  • Stabilization
    Stabilization 26 May 2016 14: 33
    0
    Let them do it, but we'll take a look ... Let them invent a power source of the required size smaller than a small house ...
  • abc_alex
    abc_alex 26 May 2016 14: 59
    +3
    Quote: potroshenko
    What is the problem on the warship to place the required power?


    As you correctly answered, it’s not about power. Although in it, too. Agree it will be strange if a shot from a laser gun cuts out the radar. Or if, for firing from a single laser gun, you need to replace half of the missile weapons with an additional generator and capacitor banks.

    But the problem here is not technology, but physics. There is a whole range of problems that arise from the presence of the Earth's atmosphere. There is no way around them. Even an increase in the power of the beam (energy flux density) rests on the threshold. At some point, you just get a "Jidai sword" and not a beam.

    I'm not saying that for shooting at high-level targets such as anti-ship missiles or anti-ship missiles, you need to deflect the beam during the shot. This requires a system of mirrors and lenses. And glass is an amorphous material. When heated (and it is heated, be healthy), it begins to "flow". In addition, the laser is scattered by any finely dispersed medium: dust, smoke, water vapor. The total efficiency of the system from all this falls incredibly, to a few percent. And these are all natural phenomena, which are technically impossible to influence.
  • masiya
    masiya 26 May 2016 15: 00
    +1
    Another direction for the noble plundering of money of the people of Britain, let them work out ... a lot of work, a little sense, but we are all fine, although they don’t cling to us.
  • 1536
    1536 26 May 2016 15: 16
    0
    The British stole money from some other victim country, possibly from Russia, and now they are cutting it. Maybe they’ll come up with something, but more, of course, they’ll steal it. A laser will do the Americans or the Chinese.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 26 May 2016 15: 54
      +1
      Quote: 1536
      The British ... will come up with something, but more, of course, will be stolen. A laser will make the Americans or the Chinese.
      Oh how! And our combat laser on "Almaz" doesn't count? Your disbelief in our Kulibins amazes!
      Academician Velikhov, speaking on TV, said that we had already solved the problem with energy storage devices. Monocrystals of quartz, ruby ​​and other crap were grown in zero gravity ... obviously not for "queen's pendants"!
      And you don’t even take Russians into account!
      "Abid, do you panim ... Wah!" (C)
      1. Simple
        Simple 26 May 2016 16: 50
        +1
        Was there a combat laser on "Almaz" ????
        :(
        I remember the telescope-camera "Agat-1"!
        Even with the modified automatic cannon HP-23 of the Nudelman-Richter design (Shield-1 system) I remember
        And there was Shield-2 with space-to-space missiles.
        But not released.
        Laser?
        "Kazan took, Astrakhan. I took. Shpak ... I did not take"
        You brought this with an alternative story?
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 27 May 2016 01: 52
          +1
          Quote: Just
          You brought this with an alternative story?

          Design Bureau "Salyut" took part in the creation of the 11F71 "Almaz" manned orbital stations. The Khrunichev Moscow Machine-Building Plant, headed by Anatoly Ivanovich Kiselev, was supposed to produce space combat stations. This enterprise assembled all the Soviet orbital stations Salyut, Almaz and TKS ships. "Almaz" was traditionally related to military topics and at one time the new project (Skif) was referred to as a new "Almaz".
          But a megawatt gasdynamic laser was built and tested. And in 1976 they successfully shot down a light-engine aircraft, which the AMA repeated only last year. So, "silence is gold" ...
          Yours faithfully, hi
          1. Absurdidat
            Absurdidat 29 May 2016 21: 10
            0
            Where are the megawatts on the satellite? In the sense of extra megawatts to bullet them?
  • lablizn
    lablizn 26 May 2016 15: 19
    0
    Somehow it is overlooked that power is needed in CONTINUOUS mode. Of course, a few tens of MJ can be concentrated in an impulse of a few microseconds, but to what extent?
    Modern gas and chemical lasers of continuous operation cannot provide such energy.
    And building rests against fundamental physical laws. If it is simpler, then at high energies the medium of photon flux generation is destroyed. And the dependence is nonlinearly increasing.
    Think of SOI and nuclear-pumped lasers. DISPOSABLE, mind you.
    The Americans are not fools, by the way, they considered everything that is needed and peacefully, quietly buried a crazy idea.
    It seems to me that such projects and publications in the Western media are another "razvodilovo" aimed at fooling the heads of military experts with, to put it mildly, lame technical education.
    1. Parsec
      Parsec 26 May 2016 19: 21
      0
      There are enough military specialists with, to put it mildly, technical education, which allows to put some adventurers from the Academy of Sciences on the ass.
  • demos1111
    demos1111 26 May 2016 15: 27
    +4
    Good day. I’m certainly not a specialist in lasers, but judging from what I know, any light source passing from one medium to another is refracted, the beam scattering effect occurs, and the farther the target, dusty or cloudy the weather, the more difficult it is to transmit the power of the beam. Since the targets are mostly moving, and the missiles can rotate, it is necessary to create such an impulse, whose power would be enough to break through the skin almost instantly. Considering the above, the question arises about the necessary temperature of the beam exiting the installation, and is there any material that can withstand it. And the ray destroying the target at a distance of 500 meters, I think it does not represent a military target.
    All these stuffing went after Russia tested hypersonic warheads and "zircon" missiles and the like.
    They have lagged behind the campaign for a whole generation in this area. It’s not surprising, considering how Clinton patted Boryu on the shoulder, not hiding laughter with mockery, they buried you then why they needed EW tools and other weapons to develop then, and for the popuars there were enough old arsenals. So I think sanctions have been imposed on this subject, although I may be mistaken. That is, if you get an air and ground-based hypersonic missile weighing up to 4000 and 6000 kg, respectively, it's hard to even imagine. You lift 150 planes somewhere near Bryansk, and the mattresses have wet pants, because the potential of these small planes is enough for their entire mattress, and they will not be able to react. If all articles about hypersound are true, this is no less serious than the appearance of nuclear weapons. Having 50 of these missiles in 15 minutes you can leave the whole Bandera without the ruling elite. In any case, without its main part. And what a lesson for the West it will turn out, and how Romanians with Poles will begin to wait.
    I know you are not yet ready psychologically, although you are practically ready technologically and believe-mature. I can imagine how much it will be necessary after the fascists to quietly drown.
  • Cube123
    Cube123 26 May 2016 17: 41
    +1
    Quote: Just
    Was there a combat laser on "Almaz" ????
    :(

    It was. And they were hit by the first drone in the USSR. More than 30 years ago. 1982 year.
  • Mentat
    Mentat 26 May 2016 18: 41
    +2
    Quote: weksha50
    Quote: pavlentiy
    I'm weak in lasers, of course, but the power supply on the truck for example? Batteries?



    That's the whole problem of combat lasers, in powerful and compact power supplies ...

    This is not a problem, especially not a “whole capsule”, but a temporary technological difficulty. The problem is that laser radiation by its properties cannot be used as a mass weapon. This has already been written a hundred times.

    the effectiveness of the use of combat lasers is too early to say ...

    It is too late to talk about the effectiveness of using a laser on the battlefield. In the USSR, fantasies on this subject ended in the 60s after clarifying those very fundamental obstacles.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 May 2016 23: 39
      -2
      "In the USSR, fantasies on this topic ended in 60 -" ////

      It's time to renew fantasies, and then the backlog in this area
      will become irreversible, as with electronics.
  • vabvab
    vabvab 26 May 2016 20: 56
    +1
    As I understand it, the main emphasis on the need for such installations is placed on the fight against drones. Just knowing all the difficulties with the laser, you somehow involuntarily think, but would it not be cheaper to make a durable shock drone that will clear the sky in automatic mode?
  • basil200
    basil200 27 May 2016 09: 02
    0
    But George Lucas didn’t have a laser, green red ...
  • Mentat
    Mentat 27 May 2016 17: 34
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    "In the USSR, fantasies on this topic ended in 60 -" ////
    It's time to renew fantasies, and then the backlog in this area
    will become irreversible, as with electronics.

    In “this area” there can be no lag, because it is not applicable in practice. Do you read comments before replying to them?

    I will expand my explanation if for some reason it is not clear to you (although, I suspect, it is clear to you just the same).

    Is it possible to create a system worth $ 2 that will set fire to Chinese plastic quadrocopters for $ 000? Can. But nobody needs it. Except, of course, those cunning companies that plan to sell such incredibly useful systems to politically and economically dependent regimes. At the same time, having cut $ 000 million “for research”.

    Is it possible to create a tool based on the well-known modern science of laser radiation that can replace, for example, the destructive effect of a modern tank gun?
    No you can not. This is impossible due to the properties of laser radiation (available power to the modern level of our civilization).

    So do you understand now?

    It is possible to draw into a “laser arms race” a country with an underdeveloped fundamental science that does not understand that it is “smoke and mirrors”. Russia does not belong to such countries. Moreover, it has a serious base of practical tests of laser radiation for military purposes. Oh, someone to rub about laser super weapons, but not for us.