chinese laser weapon development

SamuraiBlue said:

As siegecrossbow suggested it depends on range weather, exposure time,etc. A good high power industrial laser cutter of 600W can cut through if it's close enough and if you give it enough time but apparently this would not do much as a weapon.
The problem would be how to squeeze large amount of energy at one time without various electrical components to explode but is compact enough so it can be transported on a van or other small size vehicles.
Another point is direct energy weapons are not designed to defeat 1000mm of steel armor on the battle field. Missiles, cars, planes, etc. have far less armor plating to obtain maximum range.

Click to expand...

kwaigonegin said:

I know.. I was asking more of a hypothetical question. It probably won't be within my lifetime where lasers can bust open a tank on the battlefield lol.

Click to expand...

SinoSoldier said:

A new laser weapon.

Low Altitude Guard II

View attachment 21352
View attachment 21353
View attachment 21354
View attachment 21355

Click to expand...

plawolf said:

General question about the effectiveness of laser weapons, but wouldn't a reflective coating and/or spinning/rotating the missile/RV be an effective hard counter to laser weapon intercepts?

Seems like a very cheap and effective means to counter something very hard and expensive to develop and field.

Worse, such a countermeasure would be very easily, cheaply and quickly applied to existing missiles to counter laser weapons as soon as they are fielded.

How could lasers counter that?

Click to expand...

siegecrossbow said:

The problem with applying a mirror is that no mirror is 100% efficient at reflecting the beam. The amount of heat generated by weapons grade laser can and will exploit any defect (whether it be dust, cracks, or even uneven polish). You have to keep in mind that all the laser needs to do against a ballistic aerial target is to ruin its aerodynamics or detonate its fuel and/or charge. The means of coating unguided munition/drones with something that can forestall their destruction by laser for more than a few seconds is probably a lot more difficult and expensive than making and fielding the rockets/drones themselves.

Spinning the device is probably a better idea, but probably isn't practical for something like a drone or a plane. Also, I am not sure whether it is something practical to do during the boost stage of a ballistic missile -- which is the stage where the missile is most vulnerable to interception by lasers.

Click to expand...

plawolf said:

Good informative post!

However, the question and issue has never been one to discuss whether a mirrored surface could withstand lasers indefinitely. In order to defeat laser based missile defence, the reflective layer only needs to buy the missile the few extra seconds it needs to pass out of range of the laser or impact the target, as is the case with a point defence laser weapon.

Given that even commercially available mirrors can reflect more than 99.9% of light energy, you either need a laser 1000 times as powerful, or spend 1000 times for time hitting a target with a laser to achieve the same effect as with a target with a standard, non-reflective skin.

For a pulse laser, it still relies on energy transfer, and retention by the targeted object to achieve its destructive effect, although it should greatly offset spinning as a counter against lasers.

Thus, would you not need a laser an order of magnitude more powerful to take down a mirror shielded target compared to a normal, matt finish one?

Click to expand...