Is the UK's new energy weapon the answer to drone warfare?
>A £10-a-shot high-powered laser beam that will “revolutionise the battlespace” has been successfully fired for the first time.
>The DragonFire’s high-power firing of a laser weapon against aerial targets during a trial at the Ministry of Defence’s Hebrides Range was a UK first.
>The weapon, developed by Qinetiq, the UK defence contractor, is being developed to hit missiles, drones and other enemy targets.
>By using electric power, it does not require ammunition, which is seen as an advantage at a time when the West is burning through missile stockpiles by donating them to Ukraine.
>Grant Shapps, the Defence Secretary, said: “This type of cutting-edge weaponry has the potential to revolutionise the battlespace by reducing the reliance on expensive ammunition, while also lowering the risk of collateral damage.”
>He added that such advanced technologies were “crucial in a highly contested world,” and helped the UK to “maintain the battle-winning edge and keep the nation safe”.
https://archive.is/U7a5h
>bongs finally catching up to the USN
Neat. More expensive than ours though.
>the lasers originate below deck
the laser is a series of tubes?
The laser travels via optic fiber cables
Yes it's a series of tubes
Isn't this weak to reflectivr coating
If it reflects 100% of the energy, yes. However, reflective coating simply does not do that.
>may i see the cooling unit?
>"no ma'am its a square acre in size, and has to be buried 3m underground, and have freon river run over it, sorry, oh line-of-sight only! no refunds!"
>oh line-of-sight only!
It's a laser, no shit it's LOS only. No amount of R&D will change that.
Laser AA defending your cities would probably need equal capacity conventional AA on stand by in case of bad weather. Also the 10 squid a shot probably doesn't include some crucial components that need replacement every few hundred uses.
I can feel it bros. Laser warfare will soon be upon us.
Ukraine could make good use of this.
Ukraines energy infrastructure is being targeted regularly. Laser needs power to work. They could have made use of it at the start of the war, but I doubt their network can support this thing in its current state. Hasty repair jobs are likely to go bang if run at max load.
>Replace energy infrastructure with renewables, which are by their nature unreliable.
>Battery tech still hasn't caught up enough to iron out the difference.
>Develop laser weapon that consumes a metric frick-tonne of power and will massively strain on an already strained system if deployed at the scale needed to actually present a viable missile defence.
It's like we're fricking moronic or something. I'm not saying the laser is a bad idea, SHORAD is definitely headed that way, but frick me sideyways why in gods name do we have to turn everything into such a fricking circus. Westminster seems to be populated entirely by myopic c**ts.
hmm, i wonder why the US and UK are pouring so much money into small modular nuclear reactor generation
We should have started a long fricking time ago. Frick environmentalists as an ideology group, literal mouth breathers.
ok mr grumblyboo
Pretty much all of the anti-nuclear groups were funded by the Russians to keep Europe dependent on Russian oil and gas.
>Build Drone out of mirror
>Laser reflects on enemy
>Enemy gets destroyed
No, Raytheon’s palletized DEW that is currently protecting Air Force bases is
https://www.rtx.com/news/news-center/2023/06/12/raytheon-technologies-delivers-fourth-combat-ready-laser-weapon-to-u-s-air-force
When will the first grand scale usage of military laser systems occur? Wouldnt Ukraine be a good testing ground?
Just station one in Kiew in secret and call it electronic warfare weapon (which it is lol)
The Us has been using them in hotspots for over a year now with good results. Leave it to the US to be the pioneer yet again
Only works at ultra short ranges, nice weather and only if the target has no thermal coating. But a gun works there too and cheaper and no coating will help.
Lasers for this purpose ain't worth it. Too unreliable and the cost of power generation, capacitors, batteries are much higher than bullets and it runs out of juice and overheats quickly.
>Firearms will never be useful for warfare, carrying around a bunch powder and keeping it dry in the field is impossible. And the thing itself is heavy and unwieldy. An archer could empty his quiver in the time it takes to load one. Mark my words they will never be useful