Any information on what kind of laser? Last update a read (month old) pointed out that Burke's don't have the electrical power reserves to field a high power laser.
US F/A-XX and F-X 6th Gen Aircraft News Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Any information on what kind of laser? Last update a read (month old) pointed out that Burke's don't have the electrical power reserves to field a high power laser.
Skywatcher
Captain
It's a tech demonstrator, since as any first year in project development can tell you, a prototype is the first build of something that is planned for service.
Now the XF-9 has thrust of 15 tons, which would leave a sixth generation fighter underpowered. The F-3 will probably have a MTOW of 50 tons (as s rough benchmark, the F22 is 25% heavier than the F15) and the JASDF will probably want the F3 to have an engine with a full thrust of 20 tons.
The USS Preble will get the first one, unless that changes. It will replace the RAM missile system. It is the HELIOS system. It will start at 60 kw and could be upgraded to 150 kw.
I would venture to guess they are putting a big battery onboard to trickle charge to. A Tesla battery is 60 to 85 kwh. While there are efficiency significant losses - 90% loss, say - then you're looking at 8 1/2 minutes of continuous beam time for a 85 kwh battery pack when fully charged. Engagement time is far less than a minute per target.
That all said, this is getting wildly off topic. This is the 6th gen fighter thread, not the lasers on USN warships thread. My fault, tbh, but...let's steer this back.
Brumby
Major
Regarding lasers, there are a bunch of programs spread throughout the services appropriated with about $3 Billion in funding. The USN has HELIOS, the USAF has SHIELD and even SOCOM has its own program with lasers planned aboard AC-130J.
Source : Inside Defense April 17, 2019
U.S. Fighter Jets Could Soon Be Armed With Lasers
.
Source : Inside Defense April 17, 2019
U.S. Fighter Jets Could Soon Be Armed With Lasers
Jura The idiot
General
inside:
even somebody from the target group (kids who like to read and fanbois) might ask how a laser would work through clouds against "very long range air-to-air capability"
"Russian and Chinese air forces are very long range air-to-air capability, with the Vympel R-37M (NATO: AA-13A “Axehead”) missile and the PL-XX missiles. These missiles would be used to down American tanker and AWACs-type aircraft, seriously degrading the fighting abilities of U.S. and allied warplanes, or forcing them to operate farther behind friendly lines. SHiELD could at least partially negate the threat posed by these missiles."
even somebody from the target group (kids who like to read and fanbois) might ask how a laser would work through clouds against "very long range air-to-air capability"
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Laser it in the space of a few KM before termination of the kill cycle like an active defense system.
And seriously Jura Kids and fanboi??
Anyway this is part of why I suspect the next generations of Tanker and AEW will be Low Observable and it Drones.
And seriously Jura Kids and fanboi??
Anyway this is part of why I suspect the next generations of Tanker and AEW will be Low Observable and it Drones.
Jura The idiot
General
First off, you need to curb the tone, Jura. Cuz, dude, seriously, most of us have been treating you with respect and replying politely. You're not doing yourself any favors or going to convince anyone of your position by acting this way.
That said, how does it handle the Vympel et al? First off, most clouds stop at about 20k ft ( 6,000 m). Stay above that and you'll have plenty of time to shoot something.
Ideally - and I am very skeptical of this - shield was supposed to be put in a pod to be carried by an F-15. If it works - again quite skeptical you can get a milgrade laser in a pod that size - then an awacs or tanker should be able to carry that too. Which case, the tankers and awacs can shoot down the missiles targetting them even without a fighter being close enough to intercept.
As TE noted, it would be largely be meant as terminal defense anyways. Shooting down a missile would be at no further than 30 miles (48 km). The cost of the missile will be far, far higher than the cost of the energy to shoot it down. That's what I meant about the change in calculus.
Tone, please.
Actually, no. The Pentagon isn't some magic place that things just come into being because they are a good idea. Quite the contrary. The army especially for some reason. The Army managed to fsck up a lot of procurements in the last 20 years.
That said, lasers on Strykers would be useful for AD. Especially shorad. The THEL program used a 100 kw laser to shoot down mortars, 155mm, katyushas, etc. A 50 kw laser could still take down drones, mortars, and anything not flying very fast or at least not fast enough for its required engagement time. I have to tread carefully on what is a useful engagement time for power.
Solid state lasers have matured only recently. They could have 10 years ago, but the money just wasn't spent. After all, the Pentagon didn't think the Chinese or Russians would have peer capabilities, like J-20 or Su-57, operational by 2020. Oops. At least half way. They were thinking of dealing with COIN rather than peer fights. What you buy for a peer fight is different than what you buy for fighting COIN. Lasers are pretty useless in Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.
They were not a priority. That changed. Now they are. They are about 2 to 4 years out. Given Pentagon procurement speeds, that's very quick.
and to be honest you could make a case that 10 Su-57's or 20 J-20's really are NOT operationally significant?? I mean if you flew a hawk into the "chicken coop", whats gonna come up and fight?? it seems that there are complications? or at least a lack of real engagement, kind of like some of those Army projects you are talking about, it doesn't just happen... it takes a hell of a lot of money and hard work, and it takes even more to go around to all the "needy" programs...