when will they patch them?
>>64984329When the devs buff directed energy weapons and start the real rollout. They'll probably have to buff electrical generators too
>>64984381I'm skeptical lazers are the answer. Sure per shot they're cheep but the lazers themselves are hella expensive. Why wouldn't a basic saturation attack work to take out a multimillion dollar lazer? The issue is the time to kill, lazers can take them out fast enough to deal with a swarm.
Bruh, he's a counter
>>64984329>when will they patch them?they don't need a patch they dominate normal and heroic, they are useless on mythic except for in niche rolesmany such cases very sad
>>64986605Yes they're the answer.
>>64984329Don't worry. They'll be patched out when the space farer age gets unlocked. Might take a while though.
>>64984381>laserUntil they get squatted by smaller fpv drones flying low and at blindspotThat's how they whacked those camping C-RAMs with Giraffe 1X Iraq
>>64984329Just send out waves of useless shitskins to make the enemy waste them all then send in the real army.
>>64984329https://files.catbox.moe/owma3n.mp4
>>64988968they will never be the answer so long acheap energy source isnt foundabl proved this a long time ago simply put while it was economicaly viable to stop 1-3 icbm's in reality on a all out war which is literally the norm if nukes are flying the fleet of the abls they had in mind would have bankrupted a state on a single salvo
>>64989430if this isn't arma footage I'm gay
>>64989606you could be gay even if it isn't arma footagebest suck a few cocks just to be sure if you like it or not
>>64989430If this is gay footage I'm arma
>>64986605We need a $1 billion dollar 100Mw laser weapon that melts jets
>>64986605Lasers price depends a lot on what you want to take out.If you want to burn through the steel case of an arty shell going 900m/s as it spins through the air it's going to cost a lot more than melting the PCB of a plastic drone doing 30m/s.The smart option would be layering them as a few cheap anti-drone lasers defend the expensive anti-arty laser.
>>64989609good call anon but I'll leave it to you, just try and tell me
>>64989727I already know about myself but you really can't tell otherwise, I advise you to do so at your earliest convenience, you may think you're straight but your happiness might really be elsewhere. Perhaps tonight in the air raid shelter? People get horny when death is near.
>>64984329Don't we already have the perfect counter for this shit (in theory)?What lasers doing?
>>64989606Anon I...For real though, that looks like AI, with the wonky physics and the >average human handheld camera pan
>>64984329Why not use ww2 era AA wepons buffed with modern sights? Like just give each battalion an anti-dron squad and spray them with bullets no need of expensive
>>64986605I don't think they'll be the immediate answer to drone spam but, I'm sure that countries will heavily integrate lasers into their air defence grids to overall negate the impact of drones in the future. The laser sites will probably be protected by interceptor missiles and close in weapon systems as a reserve/supplement to the laser
>>64988968*reflects your laser*
>>64992128kekanon if you're not entirely memeing DEWs are typically in the near IRthey're chosen to be that wavelength specifically because metals absorb them super well, even though they reflect visible for drones you don't even need that though and they can use microwaves to just pass through the metal and fry the circuit directly--as a benefit, they are also largely weather blind; even heavy rain or a full blown sandstorm is invisible to them
>>64992336They will limit the microwave beam technology because that's the direct tech tree to tictacs / plasma decoys.
Reject modernity
>>64992455Embrace tradition
So is it feasible to let's say have a drone similar to a shahed except it rises to a very high altitude then simply nosedives into a target like a dumb bomb. Seems like that would be very hard to disable in flight.The ones operational now seem to be cruising at low altitudes so easier to intercept, relatively speaking. Or damage so they miss the target.
>>64992478High altitude means you can detect it further away. The fact that the Shasneeds fly low, and are thus masked by the radar horizon, is what makes them such a pain in the ass.
>>64992386anon microwave beams are just scaled up microwave ovens
>>64992487Russia doesn't fly their shasneeds low anymore because the Ukies started shooting them down with machine guns.
>>64984329Wow. Another droon spam thread, how original
>>64992336Anti laser reflective and ablative coatings are already a proven technology
>>64992487They do have a special honeycomb skeleton making them hard to see on radar too
>>64992478why bother? they already are producing geran 3's en mass
>>64988968If your system relies on perfect weather conditions to barely work then its dogshit.
>>64995895Without a primer on QM it's hard to explain the specifics, but basically any armor only blocks a specific band of radiation. So you can make a coating that protects against 300 nm, but it's going to do nothing against 150 nm. You have to know exactly what wavelengths your enemy is using.
>>64984381something that bothered me for a while now. But can you cover your drone in mirrors to defeat lasers?
>>64998129You can just coat it in a layer for every wavelength. The laser will burn through the layers until it reaches one sufficiently reflective.
>>64991251those do not look like videogame trees, anon.t. treefucker
>>64989582>cheap energy sourcemass-produce those naval reactors. One for every laser. And you can skimp on the shielding. Remote the trucks, no need to protect anyone from the radiation. Makes them more compact.
>>64997474Clouds won't protect you from megawatt lasers.https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/AD1055967.pdf
>>64984329Danmaku
>>64984329SPAAG SHORAD has proven very effective against drones. The main limitation is the number of available systems and ammunition.
>>64989679can we create lasers powerful enough to blind that are small enough to place on insect sized micro drones and then unleash thousands of those and use them to attack everyones eyes?
>>64998263>just make the think five meters of lead, then it'll be invulnerable!very smart you've got me
>>64998456false.owa drones can just fly around point defenses.
>>64986605Eh. The devs will probably patch them until they are viable, just like they did with missiles.
>>64998129>Without a primer on QMTry and be less pretentious please. Anyone who has ever browsed a laser thread on this dogshit board knows offensive and defensive wavelengths have to be matched. Even the conspiracy retards figured that out with the blue buildings in Hawaii theory. >>64998991Don't be ridiculous. Using some kind of coating mixture to cover expected wavelengths is something the NRL has been doing for decades now. Graphene and other nanomaterial bases have shown broadband capability especially in NIR too.
>>64998263The "burning" part is bad for the reflectivity of any layer.Also, reflective coatings do not work as laser defene. Any coating you can practically apply outside the lab will only have something like 96% reflectivity, probably less. Which means the laser is still heating the spot, just a bit slower, damaging the coating in the process and rapidly decreasing its reflectivity.
>>64998316smr's do not work in mass scale anon it has being proven already
>>64984329dev here. we've heard your concerns about the recently introduced "drones" and decided to double the payload, speed and range. much thanks for your continuing support
>>64999236maybe not in a commercial setting
>>64999211>it only increased the required time on target by literally 25x, it's worthless
What's the interception rate on Iranian missiles and drones aimed at Gulf states at right now, burgers~?
>>64999338it doesn't. the coating will get burned to a non-reflective state in the first milliseconds and from then on it's like it hasn't been there. it's a runaway process, that makes reflective coatings useless.
>>64999157I am literally a physicist working in lasers. Without being 'pretentious', all I can say is that this is not an easy problem. Crystal structure, weather, dirt, plasma generation, and weight are all massive concerns. Even if you manage 99.9% absorption (hard to do in a lab), you might have your armor melt in milliseconds or the 0.1% can still be enough to destroy the interior. If laser weaponry was trivial to defeat, they wouldn't be funding research in the billions on it.
>>64999515If 0.1% of a current laser's energy was sufficient to take down a drone, we would have had laser SHORAD over a decade ago.
