Directed-Energy Weapons | EM, Laser, Sonic, Microwave, Particle-beam etc |

chinggis wrote:Hello all!
Sometime I read somewhere on directed energy Weapons that use microwave radiation instead of laser (light). Can anyone tell me more about that, or this is SF?

PapaDragon wrote:

chinggis wrote:Hello all!
Sometime I read somewhere on directed energy Weapons that use microwave radiation instead of laser (light). Can anyone tell me more about that, or this is SF?

Lasers use light ("light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation")

There are laser-like devices that use microwave radiation instead of light. They are called Masers ( "microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation")

Same thing, different particles...

George1 wrote:Is this an "EM weapon"??

Russia’s Rostec Corporation is to unveil a super-high frequency weapon capable of taking down all kinds of drones, missiles and other high precision weapons. The presentation will be made at the Army-2015 military expo.

The Mosow Radio Engineering Institute has developed a super-high frequency (SHF) ‘cannon’. It’s designed to knock out aircraft, drones, guided missiles and any airborne high precision weapons using electronics.

The cannon creates an air-exclusion zone within a reported radius of over 10 kilometers around the defended object or installation, though the system’s exact characteristics are classified.

https://www.rt.com/news/267187-shf-cannon-russia-drones/

andalusia wrote:Should Russia be concerned about the US developing lasers and putting them on aircraft? Are the Russians investing in laser technology?http://www.vocativ.com/316949/laser-weapon-airplane/

Teshub wrote:

andalusia wrote:Should Russia be concerned about the US developing lasers and putting them on aircraft? Are the Russians investing in laser technology?http://www.vocativ.com/316949/laser-weapon-airplane/

Not at the moment. Airborne laser weapons suffer from four major handicaps:

1) Stability. To achieve burn-through of the target, the laser needs to shine continuously at the same point. Assuming it is firing at a 'dumb' target such as a drone or missile, air turbulence will make the firing platform quiver constantly in three dimensions making pinpoint targeting very tough, assuming the beam projector has exceptionally precise (and rapid skewing) tracking.  A piloted plane would probably go into evasive manoeuvres as soon as it detected the laser beam, making burn-through far more difficult.

2) Air quality. Water vapour significantly atrophies the energy in a laser beam. Whilst high altitude flight above 10k metres is relatively clear of pollutants and vapour, all it would do is push the theatre of operations (at least during the approach phase) back below or within cloud level.

3) Range of engagement. A laser whilst capable of heating/cutting at short distances, cannot hope to match the reach of a long or even medium range missile. Even clear air still atrophies beam energy and collimation spreads quickly over range.

4) Heat dissipation. Lasers are very inefficient energy-wise. Most of the power supplied to a laser system ends up as waste heat. Now aboard a naval vessel, you can dump this excess heat straight into the sea as water is an excellent heat sink. A plane however can only rely on air flow which is far worse at absorbing heat, especially at high altitudes where the atmosphere is thinner. Also bear in mind that modern fighter jets are already straining their cooling systems just running their radars.

Those are the main difficulties. Others are the need to integrate a lot of heavy capacitors from which the energy for the laser pulse is stored, additional electrical generation from the engines guzzling fuel, partial mirroring if wavelength of the laser is known plus ablative layers which can 'foul' the beam before contact, speeding up AAM missiles to reduce closing time, the limited power output of the weapon due to poor energy generation of the hosting airframe, and so on.

All in all they are not really a threat when mounted on planes, at least not against other planes. Possibly against AAM until designers incorporate laser detection and in-flight jinking/spinning to increase its lifespan to reach its target, or if the laser is only intended to burn out optical sensors. Even then, a simple aerial tactic might be to simply fire off two missiles to swamp the laser defence.

Laser systems aboard ships are a different matter, as vessels have far greater power generation, greater firing stability and easy access to water cooling.

GarryB wrote:I remember there was a famous video in the 80s or 90s showing a rocket booster being destroyed by a laser... and it was quite impressive until you actually looked properly at what was happening.

Basically the booster tube was pressure filled with air to simulate it being full of fuel and there were large I beams of steel on top of it held in place with steel cables.

the laser... which was up very close and concentrated on one point of the booster for some time eventually popped the outer surface and with a large blast of the interior gas escaping the heavy I beams crushed the booster with wire cables flying everywhere... very impressive but a poor example of an effective laser weapon.

For one thing the Soviets could easily add a small amount of spin to their rockets so the laser will not be able to concentrate on one point for long enough to penetrate through.

Secondly... and most importantly... to hit a solid or liquid filled booster you need to have your laser right next to the launch site... with incoming warheads the only target is the warhead... which will be covered in an ablative material that resists heat. Ie you are trying to penetrate a heat shield with a weapon that defeats its target with heat.... I call that pissing on your own shoes.

The Russians are much more sensible and have said publicly that their current experiments are focussed on defeating EO systems on recon aircraft (manned and unmanned) and also on satellites... a much more sensible and practical goal IMHO.

eventually they will be powerful and effective and cheap enough to use to shoot down aircraft but for the present Missiles already do that effectively enough.

Invest in them, but don't expect miracles.

BTW this talk of destroying satellites with lasers is amusing... a laser will concentrate energy on one point on a satellite and can do damage but to actually blow a satellite to bits reminds me how every car in a hollywood movie bursts into a huge fireball when shot... at least in a car there is a tank full of petrol... in a satellite there will be batteries and solar panels... ie nothing that will blow the entire platform into small pieces when hit with lots of heat.

A laser can be used to disable a satellite and even damage sensors to make them ineffective, but to blow it to bits is just BS.

Russia's Next Military Game Changer: Microwave Weapons?

New drones and fighters could fry enemy hardware from a distance.
Michael Peck
July 12, 2016

Russia will arm its sixth-generation combat drones with microwave weapons.

These weapons, which disable an aircraft’s electronic equipment, already exist today “and can hit targets within a radius of tens of kilometers,” said Vladimir Mikheev, a director of state-owned Russian electronics firm KRET, in an interview with TASS.


However, Mikheev suggested that microwave weapons can be as dangerous to the user as to the target. While Russia is developing manned and unmanned sixth-generation aircraft, which are predicted to first take flight in 2025, only the unmanned version will be armed with a microwave weapon. “The electromagnetic pulse fired by the microwave weapon is so powerful that it is extremely difficult to protect the pilot from his own weapons,” Mikheev said. “No matter how well we may shield the cabin, this electronic pulse will get through. And as a human is also, to some extent, a ‘device’ operating on the basis of receiving and transmitting electromagnetic signals, such weapons can cause heavy damage to the health of the pilot.”

“Protection is already in place today: shielding, special goggles and a glass canopy covered with gold plating to reduce radiation. However, it is so far impossible to ensure 100 percent protection.”

Echoing the same debates in the United States over manned versus unmanned combat aircraft, Mikheev said that only the unmanned version of Russia's sixth-generation aircraft will have “full technical capabilities.” He predicted these drones will be hypersonic, with a speed of Mach 4 to 5, and will be capable of flight through near space (sixty-five thousand to 328,000 feet).

Mikheev also notes that that fifth-generation aircraft, such as the F-22, F-35 and Russia’s PAK FA, are characterized by supersonic cruising speed and stealth designs. But what will distinguish sixth-generation aircraft from their predecessors is the capability to work with drones. Mikheev offered a vision of Russian drone warfare that sounds much like its American counterpart. Like the United States, Russia is embracing manned-unmanned teaming, where piloted aircraft control packs of drones.

Also like American defense contractors, Russian companies say price shouldn’t be a barrier to capability. While drones are cheaper than manned aircraft, they will never be cheap. “They will come at a serious price, given that it will be a high-tech weapon—an aircraft combining hypersonic flight speed, low visibility, high security, artificial intelligence (in order to work in a group) and the most modern weapons, including electromagnetic. The sixth-generation arsenal will also include the latest weapon control systems, reconnaissance, electronic warfare, guidance, navigation and Identification Friend or Foe.”

The U.S. military is also grappling with what a sixth-generation combat aircraft will look like. Long range, stealth and supersonic cruising capabilities are likely to be features, as will be non-kinetic armament such as microwave or other electromagnetic weapons. It is a certainty that the next generation of manned aircraft will only be a component of a larger team, with the pilot the would-be master of a swarm of drones increasingly capable of autonomous flight.

The ultimate question: Will a sixth-generation aircraft even have a pilot?

Michael Peck is a contributing writer for the National Interest. He can be found on Twitter and Facebook.

Russia, like other countries, is working on state-of-the-art arms technologies, including laser,
hypersonic and robotic weapons, President Putin said in the Black Sea city of Sochi on Friday.

President RF wrote:Warfare has always been an area where the use of advanced science and technology.
And today, in the XXI century, to strengthen the military potential of the leading countries of the world are
actively used in the development of the most promising development of weapons, the latest achievements
of science: it is and lasers, and hyper- and robotics.

Serious attention is paid to the development of so-called weapons based on new physical principles,
which allows selective, acupressure on critical elements of weapons, equipment, infrastructure potential enemy.