Re:How once-elusive laser weapons suddenly became a reality
by DuskStar on Thursday November 26, 2020 @12:17AM
(#25217086)
> I'm skeptical a laser can defend against supersonic antiship missiles and ICBMs.
I don't think lasers are meant to counter high-end threats like hypersonic missiles or MRBM/ICBM reentry vehicles. Not yet, at least. That can be done with SAMs - trading a $Xmm missile for a $Ymm missile is acceptable. (Trading that missile for a $Zk drone is not)
> these lasers probably can't fire frequently enough to defend against those.
This comes down to "dwell time to kill" and "duty cycle". Assuming 1s and 10%, you've got 6 kills/minute steady state. (Or 9 kills against a swarm incoming at 200kph with an engagement range of 5km) If the laser could do 50% for 2 minutes before taking 10 to cool down, though, it could handle 45 in that same scenario. And considering that commercial fiber lasers have duty cycles in the 50+% range sustained, I don't think this is unreasonable.
I don't think lasers are meant to counter high-end threats like hypersonic missiles or MRBM/ICBM reentry vehicles. Not yet, at least. That can be done with SAMs - trading a $Xmm missile for a $Ymm missile is acceptable. (Trading that missile for a $Zk drone is not)
> these lasers probably can't fire frequently enough to defend against those.
This comes down to "dwell time to kill" and "duty cycle". Assuming 1s and 10%, you've got 6 kills/minute steady state. (Or 9 kills against a swarm incoming at 200kph with an engagement range of 5km) If the laser could do 50% for 2 minutes before taking 10 to cool down, though, it could handle 45 in that same scenario. And considering that commercial fiber lasers have duty cycles in the 50+% range sustained, I don't think this is unreasonable.