[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/k/ - Weapons



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: imrs.jpg (324 KB, 1484x1184)
324 KB
324 KB JPG
60kW by Lockheed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/03/16/lockheed-martin-says-it-is-ready-to-hand-over-laser-weapon-to-u-s-army-for-testing
>With the 60-kilowatt laser announced this morning, Lockheed says that it has reached that goal and that the weaponry is ready to be deployed.
>“In terms of the maturity of this technology to be field-able on an Army vehicle, this technology is ready for that,” Afzal said.
>The company said its initial testing showed the laser to be near physical limits for accuracy and reasonably energy-efficient, directing 43 percent of electricity used to power it directly into the laser itself, helping it deal with the mobility problem.
>The system is designed to be a low-weight solution that sits on a ground-based vehicle called a Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT), essentially a truck designed for carrying large artillery.
>>
>>33333575
Lasers suck
Bump anyways for discussion
>>
Burkes also expected to get a 60kW laser in 2020.
http://www.janes.com/article/68550/usn-plans-accelerated-laser-weapon-fit-on-ddg-51-flight-iia-destroyer
>>
>60kW
>43% efficiency
Neat. That only sucks down slightly less than 140 kW, which can be produced with a 200hp diesel generator.
>>
What's it even for? Shooting down missiles?
>>
>>33334203
I'm guessing you'd need some more power so you could have some sort of hefty cooling system for it too.
>>
>>33333575
FFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUTTTTTTTTTTTTUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>
>>33334171
LWS was a pretty impressive testbed. The rapid engagement of many small cheap targets like mortars, rockets, dones and really unlucky humans is damn useful.

These systems are interesting, partly because they are more or less a bunch of optical welding units slaved together rather then a single laser. They don't offer the power or efficiency promised by the FEL Raython has had under development, but that dropped into a black hole of secretiveness the moment it started looking like it was really happening. Given the potential strategic missile defense applications of that system and the disruptions to geopolitical stability it represents I'd be surprised if anybody hears anything about it until it is fired in anger.
>>
>>33334239
Missiles, mortars, dones, aircraft, very unlucky humans.
>>
>>33334250
It would (to me) make more sense to piggyback the water cooling system of either the truck or the generator itself.
>>
>>33334264
>efficiency promised by the FEL Raython
FEL's show to most potential to be MW tier, but their efficiency is awful, like ~10%.
>>
>>33334276
You could, but the laser's going to be making lots of heat very quickly and should be kept cooler then the engine. You'd want quite a bit bigger radiator and more pump, at least.

A engineer on the project could tell you if it makes more sense to expand the water cooling already present in the car/generator, or if it's better to just put a cryogenic system in there to chill things the fuck down.
>>
>>33334203
>>33334250
>>33334276
>you can now power multiple military grade combat lasers with the engine in your locomotive

Hell yeah, Armored Trains 2.0 here we go!
>>
>>33334116

>not liking lasers
>mfw
>>
>>33334341
>Armored Trains 2.0
Fuck that, I wanna see laser technicals.
>>
File: PEO_SOF.png (620 KB, 1366x768)
620 KB
620 KB PNG
>>33334341
Please fund. I want my laser AC-130 now.
>>
>>33333575
Laser Technology might just be the thing that Finally ends air power's near absolute dominance, and maybe even blunts the military drone revolution. I get that the Laser truck would be outranged by atg missiles, but if it is capable of detecting and destroying them before it is hit, it is still providing effective space denial to any flying threats.
>>
>>33334377
Cyber jihad aesthetics

My dick can only get so hard
>>
>>33334422
Not so bad yourself stranger ;)
>>
>>33334416
ATGMs are already losing relevance with modern APS systems, kinetic penetrators and recoilless rifles are where its at again.
>>
>>33334116
Who doesn't like lasers?

I bet you're a hipster.
>>
>>33333575
long ass antenna gettin in the way of my lasers
>>
>>33334472
Lasers aren't, like, good for the environment, man
>>
>>33334480
It's a feature.
>>
>>33334405

This is a strange picture.
>>
>>33333575
we're in a propaganda war with China spooking each other over who has the biggest lasers. the future is now.
>>
>>33334472
Lasers suck because they're inefficient at damaging their targets. It takes several seconds to bring down an unprotected target, and effective protection isn't terribly difficult to develop either.
>>
>43% efficiency
not bad
>>
>>33334726
Yeah, but it only takes an instant to blind someone. Aim it at people's faces and watch the fun begin
>>
>>33334726
Thats only a question of power output... a 60 kw laser will burn through steel in a split second, igniting any missile or plane
>>
>>33334373
Holy Fuck I have not seen SHOOP DA WHOOP for years.
>>
<<It's time>>
>>
File: capt.jpg (37 KB, 400x267)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>33334116
Well, you're WRONG!

Modern people buy laser guns. Poor people living in mud huts get zapped and die.
>>
>>33335006
PLZ
>>
>>33334977
No, its totally not a question of power output, it is a question of how much of those 60kW are actually in the beam, and how much of what was left is actually on the target. Protip: not much.
>>
File: 02_Morgan.jpg (783 KB, 3260x2035)
783 KB
783 KB JPG
>>33335006
This

WHERE'S MY FUCKING LASER PLANE DONNIE
>>
>>33333575
Russians did it in the 70's
>>
>>33335024
That's the same as a chemical explosion throwing a projectile over distance, though the laser doesn't care about windage, drop and hits at the speed of light.
1kg of gunpowder = around 0.8kw of energy
So even if only 1/60th of it reaches the target at a given distance, atmosphere, beam dispersion etc, its not going to be pleasant for the target
>>
>>33335010

thank you for posting this, anon
>>
>>33335062
gunna need source, 60KW in a reasonably sized package would be difficult in the 70s
>>
>>33335062
Yrue. And they've been dazzling the sensors on US spysats since the 1980s and now i've read somewhere the chinks have been too.
>>
>>33334435
The RPG-29 called, it had a good chuckle when it read your post
>>
>>33335070
>So even if only 1/60th of it reaches the target
The problem is - it wont. It is already at 43% efficiency, so you only have less than a half power in your initial beam.
>1kg of gunpowder = around 0.8kw of energy
So even if only 1/60th of it reaches the target at a given distance, atmosphere, beam dispersion etc, its not going to be pleasant for the target
Again, no, not really. If we approach a complex question in a way so simple that it is almost dumb AK has power of approximately 100kW.
And 60kW is not very big of a deal even without comparing it to anything. Those lasers may show some results in perfect conditions, but a 60 kW laser burning through a 60mm mortar round would require 60mW to burn through the very same round that was simply painted with a reflective coating more or less in the ballpark of your wavelenght. Kitetic is the way to go simply because, thatks to sir Isaac Newton, it is not something to be easily dealt with, and it is simply much more stuff you can work with to achieve results that you want, with lasers you simply slam your head into diffraction and this is it, you cant do absolutely anything with it.
>>
File: C3R95bUWIAAxOPZ.jpg (161 KB, 905x1200)
161 KB
161 KB JPG
>>33334264
almost too afraid to ask but what does it do to humans? isnt there some kind of treaty not to use laser weapons against humans?
>>
>>33335010

LEEEEETS GO!!!!
>>
Looks like I missed the mega dubs. Does anyone know what it was?
>>
>>33334726
How about you come back when you actually know what youre talking about, Jr.
>>
>>33335070
>For further comparison, 1 kg of gunpowder will produce 3 megajoules of energy when exploding (about 2/3 kg of TNT); 1 kg of dynamite contains 7.5 megajoules when exploding (about 1.6 kg of TNT); 1 kg of gasoline produces 47.2 megajoules (about 10.26 kg of TNT), though of course requires an oxidant.

??
>>
>A round hits the battery
>>
>>33335125
>The problem is - it wont. It is already at 43% efficiency, so you only have less than a half power in your initial beam.

Are you an idiot
The 60kw output is the 43% of the input electrical power

Hitting something with a projectile requires either guidance or firing a shitton of them.
It also requires a 3d understanding of the location of your target + leading that target.

Lasers require only 2d knowledge, because it travels instantly
>>
>>33335141
You find posts by typing them in like quotes

>>33333333
>>
>>33335158
And Tesla wants to make electric cars LOL
>>
so many fucking mre's are going to get wrecked by lasers
>>
>>33335166
>The 60kw output is the 43% of the input electrical power
Thats your assumption, ususally when referring a laser people mention total power, not power in the beam.
>Lasers require only 2d knowledge, because it travels instantly
Trading ability to hit for the ability to penetrate and destroy? I am not sure it is a good idea, m8.
>>
>>33335175
>ususally when referring a laser people mention total power
???
No they don't
They always refer to laser output

Being able to just point, hit, and kill is exactly what any CIWS designer wants.
>>
File: 1319046214851.png (218 KB, 500x496)
218 KB
218 KB PNG
>>33335158
You can design something for that. Tanks are designed to safely burn down the magazine. I know these aren't armored but they can probably be designed for the batteries to burn out "safely"
>>
>>33335187
The guy is a moron.... I wouldn't waste your time on the cuck
>>
>>33335175
Considering that it's meant for small UAV style targets, you don't really need penetration.
>>
What happens when they miss? The laser goes into space forever and hits some poor ayylmao in 5000000 years?
>>
>>33335187
>No they don't
No, they do, its pointless to mention output power for the laser, especially specifically a mobile laser.
>Being able to just point, hit, and kill is exactly what any CIWS designer wants.
Well, you can definitely want it, and you can definitely hit... but this is exactly the point where the shield has overwhelming potential advantage over the sword. You know, we have materials that a lightweigt and can reject literally gigawatts of energy without much trouble, and we have them for almost half a century. This type of thing simply does not work with kinetic, you have to add craptons of weight, and you always have options to ramp up the caliber/load/projectile weight/muzzle velocity to easily gain anothe dozen of those lasers in energy. A mid-WW2 light AT gun in 70mm ballpark easily has 100+ times the energy of that laser.
>>
>>33335175
>Trading ability to hit for the ability to penetrate and destroy?
u fuckin wot m8?

That laser will be able to slice through steel sheets.

Industrial lasers which already do that are a lot smaller than this.
>>
File: bluesmoke.jpg (360 KB, 1200x819)
360 KB
360 KB JPG
>>33335158
it would more likely a bank of supercapacitors, not actually batteries. I have no idea what happens when charged supercap is damaged. The magic smoke will escape but I don't know if the cap will go nuclear like batteries do.
>>
>>33335198
Polished aluminium can reflect up to 98% IR.

>>33335202
>That laser will be able to slice through steel sheets.
You do realize that that laser is weaker than a single 7.62x39 round? And that it will actually loose more energy over distance than that round?
>>
>>33335212
>You do realize that that laser is weaker than a single 7.62x39 round? And that it will actually loose more energy over distance than that round?
Where is the source for this claim
>>
>>33335166
>Lasers require only 2d knowledge, because it travels instantly
Missiles only require 2d knowledge too, from their own point of view anyways.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_navigation
>>
>>33335217
Source: His arse
>>
File: 1434051292710.jpg (30 KB, 698x389)
30 KB
30 KB JPG
>>33333575
So the whole thing is tanker truck with strapped lazer beam.
>>
>>33335199
atmospheric lensing will take care of that. The laser will defocus and spread out like a flashlight. Even without that, lasers aren't perfectly collimated so they're defocus eventually.
>>
>>33335206
>I have no idea what happens when charged supercap is damaged.
It literally blows up.

>>33335217
School and (M*V^2)/2? Basic optics and angle of beam = wavelenght/beam diameter? A 2mkm wavelenght laser with 1cm beam diameter is weakened sevenfold over 100meter distance, IN FUCKING VACUUM. And the worst thing is that you cant do absolutely nothing to counter it, its a basic law of nature.
>>
>>33335206
The HEMMT truck should be able to supply the electrical power for this 60 kw laser.

You don't use capacitors for lasers dumbass
Thats a railgun thing. Or maybe a pulse laser, if such a thing exists.
>>
>>33335212
>thinking that lasers are IR or that MUH REFLECTION is good enough

Just Kek yourself already.
>>
>>33334481
Nether is sunlight.
>>
>>33335263
>herpaderp
Yes, retard, most lasers are IR, and achieving 95-98% reflectivity is not a big deal even without resorting to ablation that will easily defeat fucking gigawatt laser. Go back to school, idiot.
>>
We RE2 now.
>>
>>33335134
You are thinking of the Protocol on Blinding Lasers.

The problem is essentially that this laser is "anti-air" vs "anti-human". Kinda like how 23mm autocannons CAN be used on people, to great effect, but their main target is helos and the odd plane.

In short, the Protocol only applies to weapons purpose-built to blind people, whereas this isnt.
>>
>>33335274
How does your missile seeker have that reflectivity
How do you keep it clean while it flies towards its target
>>
>>33335134
You can't use lasers with the intention to blind, or maybe maim, but I think it's blind.
If you use it with the intention to kill you're good to go.
>>
>>33334889
I can't help but wonder why they couldn't get 90% efficiency, though.
>>
>>33335323
He's an idiot, why are you even replying?
>>
>>33335134
Simply put:
>weak laser dazzler shoot a man in the eyes, blinds them
BANNED
>powerful laser cores and pops a soldier head killing him instantly
Lawful method of armed conflict.
>>
>>33335373
lasers aren't particularly efficient devices. Common laser diodes like laser pointer are less than 20% efficient. 50% for a laser is damn good, higher than that is possible but those higher efficiency lasers typically don't have practical beam power or quality.
>>
>>33333575
Wow, what a fancy computer generated image
>>
>>33334373
what an ancient meme, I used to draw this shit in middle school
>>
>>33335323
>How does your missile seeker have that reflectivity
First thing you will have to hit it, lol. Second is that you can make a filter that would specifically filter out you laser's wavelenght. Besides, not even half of the missiles have IR seekers, radar and GPS guidance, m8.
>How do you keep it clean while it flies towards its target
You do not need to, unless you fly through a volcano eruption, in which case your laser would not work anyway.
>>
File: 1375904580599.png (26 KB, 775x591)
26 KB
26 KB PNG
>>33334405

what did he mean by this?
>>
File: Generals_Laser_Turret.jpg (13 KB, 250x199)
13 KB
13 KB JPG
>>33335284

Zero Hour.
>>
File: 314-prism-tanks.jpg (308 KB, 1200x450)
308 KB
308 KB JPG
>>33333575
aww yee mother fuckin' prism tanks nigga
>>
>>33334405
your big toe is too short what the fuck
>>
>>33335500

>First thing you will have to hit it, lol.

A beam that is unaffected by wind, gravity or the coriolis effect that travels at the speed of light which is instantaneously (for the purposes of this conversation at least). This beam can be aimed using Radar which ALSO travels at the speed of light.

Yeah, I don't think hitting your target will be a problem.
>>
>>33335400
you forgot to use memes

>RAZZLE DAZZLE
no
>BLAZE OPS
git sum
>>
>>33333575
“A medium-sized laser should be able to take out any number of drones in a very short period of time because they are so fragile.”
Does this medium laser also weigh exactly one ton?
>>
>>33335234
If you can't supply enough sustained power for a given energy weapon then you will absolutely need capacitors regardless of what it is.
>>
>>33333575
https://youtu.be/BIPCn-aYMoM?t=31

>PHASED PLASMA RIFLE IN THE 40 WATT RANGE

WHAT THE FUCK DID HE MEAN BY THIS
>>
>>33334276
You do not want to do that.
>>
>>33334377
>I wanna see laser technicals.
>>
>>33335188
That fucking pic makes me chuckle every damn time
>>
>>33336913
>one of your few mounted weapons
>up against an infinite army of giant machines
>better mount it in the back of a pickup truck

>"but they can only get a pickup truck!!!"

then where the fuck did they get the laser minigun?
>>
A guy with a shotgun watching the skies could be an effective anti drone measure as well.
>>
>>33336953
Not really, real drones that aren't a kids toy fly way higher than shotguns are effective
>>
>>33336953
Can your shotgun shoot 10,000-50,000 ft in the air?
>>
So how many years until magnetic, coil and plasma weapons hit around.
>>
File: 1489257607477.jpg (31 KB, 549x604)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>33334726

everything you said is wrong tho.
>>
>>33334416
Wasn't that part of the plot of one of the newer COD games?
>>
File: image.gif (446 KB, 499x408)
446 KB
446 KB GIF
>>33334273
>humans
Yes

YES
>>
>>33335373
Heat and electricity-to-coherent-light conversion loss.

43% is damn good.

>>33335406
Exactly.
>>
>>33334403
>>33334341
>>33334377
>>33334411
Lasers.

Lasers everywhere.
>>
File: true patriot.jpg (79 KB, 736x736)
79 KB
79 KB JPG
I can't wait for the future.
>>
>>33333575
I want a plasma rifle in the 40 watt range!
>>
>>33335406
Guns have 20-30% efficiency BTW.
>>
Over the next ten years we will see the deployment of:

- UAV airships that launch and recover smaller UAVs
- UAVs launched from submarines
- drone submarines launched from other drone submarines
- micro-swarm drones launched from UAVs
- antisatelitte missiles launched from F-35s
- railguns
- laser based weaponry in general
- also a moon base

You were born just in time to witness the US military become ridiculously OP. And this is without new forms of nuclear auxiliary power or nuclear warhead derived weaponry.
>>
>>33336953
>40 yards range
Yeah, no.
>>
>>33334341

I'd rather see the Army revisit portable nuclear reactors. Or have giant hydrocell battery trucks to provide portable power.
>>
File: wew.jpg (47 KB, 468x281)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
>>33335041

soon
>>
>>33335010
fucking kek
>>
>>33335230

>And the worst thing is that you cant do absolutely nothing to counter it, its a basic law of nature.

Frequency Modulation can help a lot though, compare an FM radio to an AM one. More specifically, applying FM onto things like rectenna power transmission makes it efficient enough to be practically feasible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_power_transfer
>>
home laser weapons when?
>>
>>33338262
>compare an FM radio to an AM one

FM radios sound better because this type of modulation has a better signal-to-noise ratio. There is a simple reason wireless power transfer is mostly used near-field.
>>
"The laser is what the company calls a “combined fiber” laser beam, bringing together individual lasers to form a single, stronger beam."
>>
>>33335456
I saw OP and immediately thought of this and that Chinese laser that just debuted and I thought,

WOW IT'S FUCKING NOTHING
>>
>>33336930
the took it off a hk fell by a missile obviously
>>
>>33340202

Big difference between a laser mounted on a navy ship and one mounted on a truck. The former has direct access to it's own power plant, the latter has maybe a diesel engine to generate power through an alternator.
>>
>>33340048
you know why they have to do it that way...
anyone can make any size of solid nd-glass laser but you have to cool the fucking things and it gets harder the thicker they are especially for continuous use.
>>
>>33340312
That is a quite reasonable point.
>>
>>33337675
Yep.
>D.E.A.D.
>Directed
>Energy
>Air
>Defence.
The future is zepplins armed with lasers to BTFO everything flying.
>>
>>33340351
well you have to consider that both would use capacitors to fire in intense bursts and not directly take energy from an aggregator/generator.
a laser truck taking stationary position and wounding up a flywheel capacitor which can give you insane amps in a very short duration would be one option.
>>
laser ar15 upper when
>>
>>33334116
>>33334203
Lasers are shit weapons.
Extremely inefficient.
Ablation of material is hard to model and predict.
Shooting through atmosphere weakens beam.
Too many negatives to list.
Stick with rail/coilguns which still would need the robotic aiming you'd use on laser shit.
>>
>>33338139
Yeah, but most of the waste heat goes out the muzzle along with the propellant gasses. With a laser it's a lot bigger pain in the ass to get rid of waste heat and so the overall power available is much more severely limited.
>YFW Ma Deuce pours hot lead out the muzzle with an average power of over 100 kW/200 horsepower in full-auto
>>
>>33342691
I fucked that up. 130 HP, not 200.
>Burgers in charge of unit conversion
>>
File: 0129203_PE283223_S5.jpg (366 KB, 2000x2000)
366 KB
366 KB JPG
>>33333575
What if the enemy has one of these?
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbjXXRfwrHg


relevant
>>
Man its gonna be bullshit when the lasers get strong enough to kill humans reasonably fast. Just seeing your comrades getting fried and not seeing the beam.
>>
>>33335171
Boy I cant wait to show you what happens when you set gas on fire
>>
File: 1454140278278.jpg (18 KB, 400x400)
18 KB
18 KB JPG
>>33334273
>very unlucky humans.
>>
>>33334405
Wow.

Good post anon. 1+
>>
>>33334373
I feel old now.
>>
File: 1488232261144.jpg (44 KB, 567x437)
44 KB
44 KB JPG
>mfw blindness will be the number 1 cause for casualties in WW3
>you might be one of the millions of completely blind soldiers coming back home

It's quite scary. It's rather lose my legs or arms than be blind.
>>
>>33343373
http://izvestia.ru/news/660375
>>
>>33343661
https://sputniknews.com/military/201702121050596384-russia-laser-weapons-tests/
>>
>>33343373

The government will just fix you up with some new robot eyes.
>>
>>33333575
>shipping it to Huntsville AL this month
Holy fuck. Never been so tempted to commit a felony for a photograph
>>
>>33342870
Lasers aren't going to be worth fielding at that point, increased energy options are going to make other options with better results (i.e. railguns) more field-ready.
All you can do with a laser is pump an ever-increasing amount of energy into it; kinetic options will always allow you more versatility and greater damage output for equivalent power investment.
>>
>>33343373
Lasers will probably be declared illegal for use in wars due to their being considered non-discretionary, at least as far as use against infantry troops. Blinding weapons and dazzlers already are, I believe.

Best case scenario dazzlers are permitted for AA use while destructive lasers are barred outside of anti-materiel/missile use.
>>
File: lasersafety-300x160.jpg (8 KB, 300x160)
8 KB
8 KB JPG
>>33343373
Jokes on you i all ready own a pair so i don't blind myself with my bomb ass laser from shanghai.
>>
>>33343706

I was surprised to find out it was up in my area in Bothell.
>>
>>33335024
60KW is the output power of the beam, not the input power.
>>
>>33335171

>internal combustion engines LOL
>>
>>33335175
No... just no.

Laser weapon prototypes have always, always, always been measured in output energy.

That said, 43% efficiency in the *field*? That dramatically decreases the power and (much more importantly) the cooling requirements. A lot of installation options that would have been impractical just became feasible.

For example, laser APS for AFVs.
>>
>>33334373
Oh god, I'm a child again!
>>
>>33336679
But Anon, what use is a laser with a 270m range?
>>
>>33335094
You mean RPG-30? RPG-29 got BTFO by Trophy in the latest Gaza shitfest.
>>
>>33336930
the laser minigun store, you dork
>>
>>33336679
>Only 1.4 tons Ferro-Fibrous Armor
>Not Scout Atlas'
>MFW I have no face cause I'm an Overlord-class drop vessel
>>
>>33338158
Nope, US has been OP at least slightly since at least like ~70% of us were born
>>
>>33335271
>>33335271
Oh, well, that's like your opinion, man.
>>
I wonder how they dissipate the 80kW of heat generated by the laser.
>>
File: 1485849499829.jpg (21 KB, 427x427)
21 KB
21 KB JPG
>>33334273
in only a few years you'll be able to post webms of some unlucky middle eastern bastard being fried like a giant robot anime character for guaranteed replies
>>
File: 1489707796897.png (343 KB, 1000x1000)
343 KB
343 KB PNG
>>33334373
it's been too long
>>
>>33336028
laser countermeasures when
>>
>>33344032
Lasers in aerospace combat have ranges measured in kilometers, which suggest their poor accuracy on the ground has more to do with other factors such as atmospheric diffraction than their actual power.
>>
>>33333575
In order to frame this discussion, I'd like to mention that the Navy thinks that it needs 300 kW lasers in order to start shooting down AShMs. ~MW lasers for ABM work.
>>
Right, before any of you cunts start talking about lasers, at least read this first. It's Navy stuff, but it's written so uneducated Congressmen can understand how this shit works, what is good about it, what is bad about it, and what is needed.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R41526.pdf
>>
>>33344684
Are the energy requirements additive when we consider multiple lasers shooting at the same AShM or do we need a more complicated formula?
>>
>>33344708
If you could have them all hit the exact same point with equivalent amounts of diffusion as the 300 kW laser and keep them hitting the same point, it'd work. But that's not realistic, and so we'd need a much more complicated formula, if it were even possible with current technology levels at all.
>>
>>33343744
Lasers are 99.999% accurate.

Accuracy vs firepower. That's why you mix your weapon loadouts.
>>
>>33344684

That may be so, but as the article indicates, this system is designed to counter smaller, slower targets.

>>33344864

>That's why you mix your weapon loadouts.
On that note, the Army has that base covered with the MML platform--which, in a stroke of genius not always evident in the Pentagon, is also built on HEMTT, the same chassis being used for the laser (assuming that 3D rendering represents what the Army has in mind).

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-us-armys-new-missile-launcher-has-super-game-changing-19074
>>
>>33344257
The same way you dissipate the heat in your car.

That 210hp (156 kW) Internal Combustion Engine has most of its energy lost thermal transfer, both out the exhaust pipe and by the cooling jacket that sends it to the radiator.

Same with your PC, the waste heat goes to a radiator (either by heatsink or by liquid flow).


They probably have the whole assembly jacketed in plated copper fins with coolant flowing by in high volumes to a dedicated radiator & intercooler so the returning fluid is chilly.
>>
>>33344257
Same way you disappate the heat of the car engine produces 2-3 times that much..
>>
File: 1485380834896.jpg (156 KB, 1019x881)
156 KB
156 KB JPG
>>33334273
>unlucky humans
>>
>>33336976
>>33337328
This new weapon is clearly designed as a means to combat off the shelf drones that non-state armies are using for reconisance and bombings. The other day, a 3 million dollar patriot missile was used to shoot down a $300 quad copter. That's not a cost effective countermeasure. A laser AA station is, but so is a dude with a shotgun.
>>
>>33338174
Portable nuclear reactors are just begging to be targeted by jihadis and reused as dirty bombs stateside.
>>
>>33335199
some ayylmao cat is going to go nutz over our lazer point in a 40k years
>>
File: 1479840415801.jpg (23 KB, 337x367)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
How is this going to affect air-to-air? Couldn't you strap anti-missile lasers onto bombers or fighters that could make missiles pretty damn ineffective? I mean the RADAR you'd need to achieve this would be substantial, but it would probably be worth it.
>>
>>33345146
too fuckin heavy
>>
>>33344684

If you read OPs article, you would know that Boeing has a 10kw laser turret that shoots mortars out of the air.
>>
>>33345146
https://www.scribd.com/doc/260233033/HEL-Tactical-Aviation?secret_password=bY1mX8aVn0edQtJhRCUa

Here you go. This is a bit old, but you can get the idea.
>>
How long till they start sticking lasers on fighter jets? I want to see us finally wipe that smug fuck grin off Kim Jong Un's face as we turn his artillery pointed at Seoul into scrap metal and have our fighter jets atmoizing his dilapidated fleet of soviet hand me downs above his ghost capital.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3918170/US-Air-Force-test-laser-weapons-supersonic-fighter-jets-2019-generation-Air-Dominance-fighters-use-radical-weapons.html

please god let this happen.
>>
>>33345134
every single nuclear power plant has huge amounts of nuclear material sitting in polls besides them
It's hardly even guarded
>>
>>33345347
thank the idiots the killed yucca mountain for that
>>
>>33345350
or the idiots who keep killing breeder reactors
>>
>>33335171
>He doesn't know that a full tank of gas is the energy equivalent of like 20 sticks of tnt.
>>
>>33345356
it hurts anon.

i found out recently that we can now get uranium out of ocean water. It's economically viable even in its early prototype form. uses plastic ropes. There's like 30 billion tons of uranium in the ocean and the stuff in the crust that's at the ocean bottom will keep the levels constant as we romove it, there;s about 100 trillion tons of it it in the oceanic crust, enough for forever.

We could flip the saudis off and have clean power forever, but it makes jane B. Granola feel bad in her stunted soul so fuck it let's fund more shitty solar startups and jerk around with bullshit.
>>
>>33335171

>wants to

You haven't been in a Tesla yet? They're fucking phenomenal, gasoline powered commuter cars can go suck a dick. The only reason not to buy an electric for every day transportation is if you need a truck.
>>
>>33345374
I made a presentation in 2010 about recovering Uranium from seawater and a lady in the audience asked me why I wanted to poison the oceans...
>>
>>33342729
They last an extra .0000000001 seconds that it takes for the beam to melt through the mirror and then totally ZAP them.
>>
>>33345384
Enjoy your firey death
>>
>>33333575
someone tell these yuys:
>>>33345485
>>
>>33345146
>How is this going to affect air-to-air?
Cockpits would require curtains as must option.
>>
>>33342163
lasers are not against the same targets you use a railgun on you retarded cuck.
lasers are good for tiny fast soft skinned things like missiles drones and planes. ciws basically.
it is also good for killing propulsion of small boats without eradicating the crew and hostages.
railguns are good against armored targets that are relatively immobile or entrenched. it also works in indirect fire.
>>
Are these lasers basically INVISIBLE burn beams?
>>
>>33346688
Unfortunately yes.
>>
>>33346726
That's pretty fucking spooky.

Just running along, and then bam. Leg or torso hits a laser beam.
>>
>>33346799
You should be more worried about your eyes boiling and exploding out of nowhere.

Which is why everyone wears full face and glowy camera eye helmets in the future.
>>
So, for the unitiated/laymen, how much damage can a 60W laser do to a person? I know that if hit in the eyes, it'll blind someone, but how much damage could it do to a person? How long of an exposure do you need to see something on a human target?
>>
>>33333575
This was already tested and passed field-trials when it blew up the SPACE-X missle in Miami a few months back.

>>33347640
a 5W will burn/melt your skin within 3 seconds of exposure.
>>
>>33335125
>with lasers you simply slam your head into diffraction and this is it
You are aware that reflective materials still absorb the heat and some of the light induced on them, right? You don't just "deflect" heat energy.
>>
File: 1480096069541.png (393 KB, 450x450)
393 KB
393 KB PNG
>>33345392

Letting women vote and hold office was the worst thing our species has ever done. I'd be playing golf on fucking Titan right now if we hadn't done that stupid shit.
>>
>>33347758
>You don't just "deflect" heat energy.
you wanna tell that to muh lightsabre, faggit?
>>
>>33347640
Pic related, but even faster
>>
>>33334908
You know that weapons designed to cause permanent blindness are banned by the 1995 united nations protocol on blinding laser weapons.
>>
>>33344894
The only downside of the MML that I've seen is that it can't carry Slammers; it's limited to Stinger/Sidewinder.

Considering that it's a box of missiles on the back of a truck, though, with detection/tracking being handled offboard by another vehicle or system, that should be relatively easy to fix if they decide to do so.
>>
>>33345134
A modern "portable nuclear reactor" is still the size of multiple CONEX boxes. We'd use it at a major base or FOP, not a COP out in the sticks.
>>
>>33347873
He was just aiming for the head, sarge! It just so happens that their eyes are in the way!
>>
>>33345146
We already do this today, with low-powered lasers designed to dazzle IR seekers.

Look up DIRCM.

A high-powered laser lets you hard-kill anything, including radar-guided missiles. It's a natural upgrade to an aircraft's defenses, in addition to the obvious offensive uses.

So, yeah, expect it to happen.
>>
>>33346688
Yes but the ablation caused by them is not strong enough to slice off a human limb in one pass. Blinded eyesight and burning yes, laser vivisection yes.
>>
>>33345508
Because gasoline is completely harmless when set on fire, right?
>>
>>33346547
Railguns or more specifically HVP are designed to be able handle mobile targets as well like missiles, drones, and surface vessels. They would be guided, and would burst ahead to the target, releasing tungsten pellets. Pretty deadly at mach 6.
>>
>>33348053
This makes me wonder how effective a railgun-fired surface-to-surface rods from god system would be
>>
>>33345146
Lasers kill everything that has a combustible core very fast.
They won't stop shit that doesn't care about heat and moves fast, like boolits or railgun projectiles.
It also requires RADAR to aim so anything that can get around RADAR doesn't give a shit.
>>
>>33348103
It would be like sabot artillery. A railgun wouldn't be able to launch anything heavy enough to have the rods from the gods psuedo explosion effect. Real rods from the gods would need to be huge, and probably be put into space in multiple pieces in multiple trips. You might be able to launch it at once with a thunderwell. Does it count as WMDs if the nuke is the propellant charge but not the projectile?
>>
>>33348008
Gasoline doesn't burn as fast or as hot as a battery does
>>
>>33334373
Holy fuck I'm ancient
>>
>>33347873
Why follow a ban on weapons that very well may cause the enemy to just not want to deal with that shit.
>>
>>33334373
I was 13 last time I saw this.
>>
>>33348296
They're considered non-discriminative. Or, in other words, they can affect too large a potential civilian populace.
>>
>>33348190
Ostensibly the propellant nuke would be of a small enough size to not constitute a significant fallout effect, and if detonated in space and not within the Van Allen Belts (or in a weak enough state to not disrupt them) would not cause significant ground damage, so common sense says no.

Common sense and reality tend to disagree.
>>
>>33348296
it's not hard for developed nations to create protective headgear against lasers.
and dazzlers are not banned because in theory they don't cause permanent damage.
>>
>>33348053
effective rate of fire in practice makes it out of the question if railguns can be used as ciws. especially in space where cooling is a bit of a problem.
>>
>>33335353
dealing with tens of thousands of blind people would be a god damn nightmare.
would permanently maim the morale of people from that country for decades.
and in a way that would make them angry and want to fight.
>>
File: maxresdefault.jpg (182 KB, 1920x1080)
182 KB
182 KB JPG
>>33340359
Mounted
truck

Directed
Energy
Weapon
>>
File: 2995.png (1.72 MB, 1504x1717)
1.72 MB
1.72 MB PNG
>>33349219
Railguns are supposed to achieve 6 rounds per minute and would supplement existing ship defense.
>>
>>33349219
You can always dial down the energy input and velocity in order to achieve a higher fire rate. Using smaller projectiles will also help.
>>
File: ADF-01_Falken_(Laser).jpg (313 KB, 834x626)
313 KB
313 KB JPG
>>33337398
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARAUDER

Went dark in 1995.
>>
>>33333575
>>33334203
What's the beam factor?
>>
>>33349717
I really want to know that happened to Mahem.
http://www.darpa.mil/program/magneto-hydrodynamic-explosive-munition
>>
File: 1478817080171.gif (3 KB, 250x242)
3 KB
3 KB GIF
>>33349812
I dont have an answer, but usually when something like this goes "dark", you can bet development has progressed beyond the fanciful idea phase.

On a different note, search 121G on this link and tell me what they are trying to tell us.

http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/home.oap
>>
File: (16).jpg (60 KB, 550x366)
60 KB
60 KB JPG
>>33334373

>tfw I first saw this when Dubya was president
>>
>>33349631
>Railguns are supposed to achieve 6 rounds per minute
maybe in a decade. right now one shot every 6 minutes.
>>
>>33349710
it's not the energy that's the problem if you scale down the projectiles you can forget about self guiding for one, and the intense heat the giant arc welder known as a railgun produces is enough to turn it's surface to metal vapor. this heat has to go somewhere. it's a few orders of magnitude higher than conventional guns produce and even they warp and shit.
>>
>>33343373
>Give every soldier an Oculus Rift with a camera on the front
>>
File: shoop da woop.gif (1.03 MB, 200x150)
1.03 MB
1.03 MB GIF
>>33334373
FUCK YEAH LAZOOORRRRZZ
>>
>>33334373
Haven't seen that in a long while.
>>
>>33335230
You know less than you think, the inverse square law is created by diffusion, so optically focused beams don't magically lose their potency. They lose potency as they diffuse.

Tl;dr: Laser beams aren't a lighbulb behind a sheet with a pinhole.
>>
>>33347731
Ok, thanks for the info. Though I'm wondering what a 60W laser will to to metal. How much steel would it melt through given continuous exposure to the beam and how long would it take?
>>
File: 1325780357476.jpg (61 KB, 250x250)
61 KB
61 KB JPG
>>33342741

>USS Ponce
>>
>>33349717
>The weapon was able to produce doughnut-shaped rings of plasma and balls of lightning that exploded

Holy shit that's metal as fuck.
>>
>>33335134
After this gets fielded, it will only be a matter of time before some poor infiltrator crawling through the wire gets spotted with night-vision and suddenly feels an intense burning sensation.
>>
>>33345347
I mean, it's usually in the reactor building right next to the rector, which is a pretty fucking secure location. Even the main cooling pool is going to be close by, or in the basement.
>>
>>33345347
Lol not a problem if you deactivate the atoms
>>
>>33349812
Fell apart when it was realized that the explosive pumped mag fields did not shape the copper jets well enough
Did give us plasma beam antennae though for being able to talk from Siberia to Leningrad.
>>
>>33335006
that looks like it wouldn't be very aerobic.
>>
File: 6567576576.png (507 KB, 629x808)
507 KB
507 KB PNG
>>33334373
oh god 2007 pls no
>>
>>33352009

Nah it's clearly got a couple of big intakes.
>>
>>33342729
retarded post, still made me chuckle
>>
>>33335400
>>powerful laser cores and pops a soldier head killing him instantly
>Lawful method of armed conflict.

We were firing at his belt buckle, sir.
>>
>>33345347
Nuclear Engineer here. That stuff in the pool is spent fuel, and it's loaded with fission products, actinides, and activated metals which make its extremely radioactive and dangerous to steal.

Also, since 9/11 security at US plants is much higher. Chain-linked fences with razor wire, vehicle barricades, cameras, and guards with ARs. They can also just lock the security doors and hide behind their reinforced concrete walls.
>>
>>33345350
They also planned to use all the titanium for the drip shields, which was a bit impractical.
>>
>>33349536

kek
>>
File: halo.jpg (71 KB, 700x394)
71 KB
71 KB JPG
>with the invention of guns came armor to withstand such weapons
>with the upcoming invention of laser weapons and their usage in the field against aircrafts, drones, and maybe even people or tanks, shields will be invented
>mfw
https://youtu.be/_CZCGOZSzz4
>>
>Beam cannon, ready to engage!
>>
>>33335175
usually when referring to a gun caliber people mention the diameter of the cartridge, not the diameter of the bullet
>>
>>33343794
>implying advanced dazzler weapons will not use multiply frequencies to bypass protection filters
>>
File: xckd spent fuel pool.png (22 KB, 432x288)
22 KB
22 KB PNG
>>33345347
>>33351529
>>33354179
https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
>So, as far as swimming safety goes, the bottom line is that you’d probably be ok [swimming in a spent fuel holding pool], as long as you didn’t dive to the bottom or pick up anything strange.
>But just to be sure, I got in touch with a friend of mine who works at a research reactor, and asked him what he thought would happen to you if you tried to swim in their radiation containment pool.
>“In our reactor?” He thought about it for a
moment. “You’d die pretty quickly, before reaching the water, from gunshot wounds.”
>>
>>33356611
>>33354179
Try to google terrorism and spent fuel pool.
>>
>>33347873
Who gives a rats ass about the United nations? If needed they turn their head when USA or someone else does fuck up.
>>
>>33349631
You gotta love these crazy graphics!
>>
>>33340048
PALPATINE DID NOTHING WRONG
>>
>>33357730

I assume that one is simulating Hormuz.
>>
>>33355742
shields are the least likely to protect you from lasers tho.
you are better off using slant metal plates with high reflectability.
>>
>>33350373
There's no such thing as perfect focus, even with a laser
>>
>>33354179
>Also, since 9/11 security at US plants is much higher.
I forget, were the break-ins in Tennessee after 9/11 or before it?
>>
>>33361671
theoretically you could do it in vacuum.
not in atmosphere presumably.
but the limiting factor is our current lens technology right now. it's shit. you don't really need perfect focus tho.
>>
>>33361714
There's no such thing as perfect focus, even with a laser in a vacuum. Unless your lens is infinity in diameter
>>
>>33361735
like i said you don't need perfect focus, but you can make it in theory with laser. technically doing it is the problem.
>>
>>33361735
>Unless your lens is infinity in diameter
that makes no sense whatsoever an infinite diameter lens would not do anything to the light passing through except somewhat slow it down.
>>
File: shoop.png (296 KB, 2122x3000)
296 KB
296 KB PNG
>>33334373
Oh exploitable
>>
>>33335171
regular cars are powered by gasoline explosions are you thick?
>>
>>33349727
Somebody knows more than memes about lasers.

Of course it is classified.

>>33335134
Like taking a plasma torch to a steak.
There are no laws, protocols, or treaties on the use of laser weapons for a kill effect on humans.

That will have to be hashed out as soon as the US puts a proper laser weapon system in deployable inventory.
>>
File: 1486429357166.jpg (152 KB, 1920x1499)
152 KB
152 KB JPG
>>33334373
>>33335010

Two perfect posts in one thread in response to the same post. Today is a good day. Thank you, anons.
>>
>>33361671
Yes there is no such thing as perfect focus, but the inverse square law assumes no focus. If beam diameter is x at 1 meter and 2x at 50 km, your intensity (y) is 1/4y at 50 km, not 2 meters. And if 2x is still smaller than the target, the joules lost is equal only to diffraction loss, nothing is lost to dispersal.

Comprende?
>>
>>33356611
>>instead of gamma ray, these spent fuel rod shoot bullets.
>>
>>33335134
Optical and IR lasers aren't great weapons for shooting humans.

Low energy cutting lasers, the kind they are putting into slaughterhouses and butcher shops as a replacement for a saw that never needs cleaning and is always sterile, use a low energy, steady beam.

Combat lasers don't. They don't really cut.

When the laser hits it burns though the skin and hits subcutaneous tissue. Fat, blood, ect. To a laser, it's all water. The water heats up and instantly stops the beam by vaporizing, that high density steam under the skin absorbs all of the remaining energy from the pulse.

Of course when steam absorbs energy it gets hotter and expands. The vapor escapes though that itty-bitty hole the laser made, but the pressure rises too fast for that and something has to give. That thing that gives is the thin layer of skin, blowing it off by the pressure.

So you end up with something like exploded blisters on the body. Fluid-oozing craters in meat maybe 2-3cm deep and 3 centimeter radius. Note that it's agonizing but not very lethal unless the laser drops several pluses in the same place, the craters get deeper where they overlap.
>>
>>33361204
Chrom Tanks!!!!
>>
>>33333575
the problem with lasers is the range they can only fire in a strait line, unlike ballistic rounds which can arc. this means targets on the ground past the horizon (the point where the earth curves) can not be hit from the ground with a laser. Lasers would only be good for ground to air, air to ground, and air to air.
>>
>>33364175
>There are no laws, protocols, or treaties on the use of laser weapons for a kill effect on humans.
It can bee argued that hard kill laser can be treated as pure incendiary weapons that are prohibited to use against humans.
>>
>>33366930
That sounds horrific tho
>>
>>33367734
I thought that incendiaries could be used against humans for their thermal properties, but not for their chemical properties.
>>
>>33366930
So you're saying that it could do more damage if it fired in quick pulses?
That the best thing to kill infantry would be some sort of small... pulse laser?
>>
File: latest[1].png (834 KB, 1280x720)
834 KB
834 KB PNG
>>33333575
I can't wait for the future.
>>
>>33367459

Well yes, their main utility for the foreseeable future is definitely defensive and maybe precision attack.
>>
Random future tech weapon qtddot.

Always wondered why they dont make a rail gun round with a conductive outre coating that charges an internal capacitor or super capacitor. Wouldn't that like release a frig ton of electrical, explosive, heat, and possibly EM energy on target?
>>
>>33366930
Sounds horrifically neato, got any sources for that id be interested in learning more.

>>33367734
you can use incendiaries on combatants. they commonly are as well. the only real restrictions on incendiaries is not to use them in built up areas with a civilian populace and or indiscriminately in such areas. not that those are really enforced or cared about by anybody.
>>
>>33372213
no
>>
>>33372213

At that point, why not just shoot plasma instead which will give you both the kinetic energy of the impact and burn through basically anything. Bear in mind, plasma can be suspsended/moved/manipulated by magnetism like regular coilgun slugs can. Only issue is that you'd need a way of making plasma in a normal oxygen-rich environment.
>>
>>33340048
The empire literally did nothing wrong.

Fucking space jihadies
>>
>>33333575
no anon, think about fuckery
laser time is in 20 years.
>>
>>33372971
Plasma lacks the cohesion necessary to stay together in atmo. as air is a very poor conductor id expect a capacitor round to not have similar drawbacks. probably not a workable idea i admit, and on the nose it seems like you would have the inherent issue of charge times(is time moving down barrel enough) and likely trading velocity for increased capacitor charge. still like it and would love to ask somebody in the know what they think though
>>
>Outside the firebase, a few Hadjis crept closer to >their mortar pit. A tall funnel rose and an invisible >ray of heat leapt from man to man, and there was >a bright glare as each was instantly turned to fire. >Every Jihadi and goat became a mass of flames at >the touch of this savage, unearthly heat.
>>
>>33373305
>My face when they sunk the ThunderChild
>>
File: 8KMtiGC.jpg (158 KB, 399x388)
158 KB
158 KB JPG
>>33373851
Fuck forgot pic
>>33373305
>>
>>33334273
Join the military you might be the first human killed directly by a laser!
>>
>>33335200
>No, they do, its pointless to mention output power for the laser, especially specifically a mobile laser.
you are fucking demonstrating how important it is to have the output power, and you think no one states it? what you think you're just that smart that no one else thought of it?
>>
>>33334341
Are there any major train lines in Syria?
Why haven't we seen sandnigger-rigged armored train assaults?
>>
>>33352009
>aerobic
Duh, aerobics kill gains dude.
>>
>>33361671
>>33361735
actually there are now metamaterials that have a negative refractive index, i.e. they have more focusing power than any solid material could possibly have
(I'm still not really sure what you mean by "perfect focus" though)
>>
>>33366930
Yeah, but that's assuming a lack of pulsing. With multiple slightly lower-power lasers, each optimized for ultrashort pulses, you could prolly dig trenches into flesh lickety-split. Or, you could dig a hole with a series of short pulses, then do a larger one to create a steam explosion inside someone.
>>
File: 0Ow2bPv.png (148 KB, 636x657)
148 KB
148 KB PNG
>>33374158
Explain
>>
>>33374158
I've heard such metamaterials enables to possibility of a cloaking device, is this possible or just bullshit?
>>
File: forever k.jpg (33 KB, 604x453)
33 KB
33 KB JPG
okay okay okay
all this laser dicksucking but can someone explain something to me?

>why hasnt the DOD or any of the branches created a fucking inexpensive drone with a 40mm autocannon on it?

I just cannot understand why there isn't a cheaper platform thats basically air based artillery yet.
is it because they just want super expensive platforms that can launch hellfires?

At this point why a dedicated cheap 40mm anti personnel air drone isnt around makes me question everything.
these things could be everywhere and there still isn't one on the drawing boards yet?
>>
>>33372213
You shouldn't have slept through high school physics.
>>
>>33374758
It would only work for a narrow band of wavelengths, rendering it useless for most purposes.
>>
>>33374406

or you could just melt trenches into existence using an exposed nuclear reactor. The AEC studied such a concept in the 1950s.
>>
>>33374734
it's a bit beyond me, it has to do with how electromagnetic radiation behaves as waves
>>33374758
this >>33375438
although if you could adjust it it could possibly do that, but at present things have to built out of totally different materials to work with different wavelengths
>>
>>33375252

Because 40mm autocannons are big heavy objects that need a big aircraft (like an AC-130, wingspan 135') to move it. They also have lots of recoil, as opposed to missiles which don't. That said, it's certainly possible to build an aircraft for it. But I'd have to at least be the size of an A-10 (58' wingspan), which itself noses up when it's 30mm autocannon fires. The RQ-4 (131' wingspan) is a much better candidate because it's wings are much larger.

Food for thought: this is one of those situations where a biplane drone would make sense. While it would have very high drag (making it unsuitable for high speed flight), it could carry a massive payload and move (comparably) very slowly without stalling. These are features you'd want if the plane is having to line up a target and shoot it with a 40mm round (as opposed to dropping a guided missile that has control surfaces).
>>
>>33375252
>>33375643
They're busy working on little drones with the rough equivalent of a 40mm grenade mounted to its nose, if it makes you feel better.

Now imagine that plus this:
https://youtu.be/ndFKUKHfuM0
>>
>>33374158
I should amend this, the other important thing (especially as to spreading) is that these materials exhibit less diffusion that empty space, which makes any lens made with them that much more efficient of a transferrer of energy and of course can aid in focusing
>>
File: syria-rail-map.jpg (170 KB, 798x598)
170 KB
170 KB JPG
>>33374125
>Are there any major train lines in Syria?
Not really, no.

I'm pretty sure that answers the other question as well.
>>
File: amazing.jpg (322 KB, 1608x2001)
322 KB
322 KB JPG
>>33375664
>>33375643
okay okay. but it I still say you take one of those faggot looking UFO circular drones, that have the rotor internally.
you make a viable platform out of one of those with some decent FLIR and a chain fed version of a 40 mike launcher (either the one on humvees or the one arnold uses in T2) whatever

couldnt you just have a quick response drone functioning on a >100 man level that could just circle people that are deployed and maneuver to trouble spots?
I mean we already have the spotting drones.
we already have fuck huge anti armor drones with six chains of command between the ground and some dude in a shack in Utah.

why cant we just have a whirly birdy deathy dirty floating around with some faggot operating it with an old xbox 360 controller on the ground in front of some display box that could be set up anywhere?

just strictly used for taking out combatants in non contested air space.
yeah AA guns could wipe em out but thats why you make them cheap and not flying into AA barrages.

>just imagine if those stupid FOB's all over afghanistan could just send this thing up instead of waiting a few hours for a apache to show up to deal with a 2 man team in the opposite mountain side
>>
>>33375952

>couldnt you just have a quick response drone functioning on a >100 man level that could just circle people that are deployed and maneuver to trouble spots?

yeah it'd be an airship that would deploy missiles, or drones armed with smaller missiles
>>
>>33375952
stuff like that's being investigated as well. hand-launched, truck-launched, conventional take-off......aircraft, helicopter, multirotor, tiltrotor....

It's a wild west out there with drone development right now, think of any crazy fucking idea for small to micro sized unmanned military aircraft and I can pretty much guarantee you that at least three companies are working on it, though a lot of those are just 2 guys gluing something together in a shack in their free time. There's limited research funding to go around though so only a small subset of concepts have made it to the prototype stage so far. Also, a lot of these concepts are going black once they show some promise.
>>
>>33376078
thats good. I'm just so goddamn surprised it isnt around yet. I guarantee you its because
>we need hellfires on everything so it can take out tanks when China or Russia invades the continental US
>aka please give the fucking air force and army a couple billion more for RandD instead of just cranking out a simplistic answer that should have been achieved a decade ago

because not like fighting insurgents in the sandbox armed with old soviet weapons using hit and run shit and hiding behind civvies isn't what we've done for dozens of years and wont be doing for another century

just take a fucking apache, strip it down to nothing but a 40mm launcher and pass these things out to everywhere troops gotta deal with sniper fire or hunter killer teams

>wow should we call in some howitzers or f-18s and hope it doesnt wipe this village?
nah just send up the drone and pop a few rounds of high explosive in that mud hut over there
>>
>>33375952
Anon, a 40mm auto cannon and a jury rigged 40mm grenade launcher(what i think you mean) are two totally different beast. something like a melkor or really maybe just 4-8 40mm grenades with fins attached(let gravity do the hard work) to a man portable drone might be possible in the near future. wouldn't be too surprising of an upgrade for a fire team or larger element
>>
>>33376579
Problem being they can shoot it down with a rifle, and waste all your money.
>>
>>33376687
thats the point of making it cheap and durable.
and almost anything can get shot down with small arms fire anyways. or lucky rpg shots even.
>>
>>33376687
yea, i mean what average goat fucker with a 35yr old kalish cant easily shoot down a ~36" target at 150-300m that almost blends in with its surroundings while darting around silently dropping HE on them.
>>
you know why a 40mm air mortar system wont be developed?
too cheap
doesnt make a big company rich without them overdeveloping it for 5 years
makes sense

instead you will get some project starting that way and in a couple years and a few hundred million dollars you get some predator reaper hybrid thats made for anti ship missiles to be built by whatever congressmans district that held out long enough for lockheed to cave




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.