Phased Array Grasers?

This is somewhat of a repeat of a subject that was addressed quite some time ago by certain folks such as KZT, Relax and some anoymous Namelessfly.

It seems that people were precient.

https://defense-update.com/20140307_suc ... asers.html

This is a visible light or IR spsctrum laser array, but it domonstrates the principle. If applied to Gamma Ray wavelength emitters, this system could outrange Apollo controlled MDMs. Of course the light speed time lag would be a bit problematic, but FTL comm to recon drones might solve that problem.

Even more interesting would be a detection AND weapons system using phased array grave pulse emitters.

Are Point Defense Laser Clusturs phased array lasers?

Imagine a spherical protrusion from the ship with emitters on the surface and capacitors and power conditioning inside the hull. The FC computers work out the targeting then allocate power with phasing commands to the portion of the emitters (about 1/5) that can be brought to bear. Given enough available power and engagement geometry allowing, one such Phased Array Laser Cluster could simultaneously engage multiple targets.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Are Point Defense Laser Clusturs phased array lasers?

Imagine a spherical protrusion from the ship with emitters on the surface and capacitors and power conditioning inside the hull. The FC computers work out the targeting then allocate power with phasing commands to the portion of the emitters (about 1/5) that can be brought to bear. Given enough available power and engagement geometry allowing, one such Phased Array Laser Cluster could simultaneously engage multiple targets.

PDCs have multiple discrete emitters. Each emitter can only fire up to a fixed maximum number of shots per emitter per period of time (which I believe is on the order of once per minute). A PDC with 8 emitters can fire 8 bursts per minute, at that rate.

Fox2! wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Are Point Defense Laser Clusturs phased array lasers?

Imagine a spherical protrusion from the ship with emitters on the surface and capacitors and power conditioning inside the hull. The FC computers work out the targeting then allocate power with phasing commands to the portion of the emitters (about 1/5) that can be brought to bear. Given enough available power and engagement geometry allowing, one such Phased Array Laser Cluster could simultaneously engage multiple targets.

PDCs have multiple discrete emitters. Each emitter can only fire up to a fixed maximum number of shots per emitter per period of time (which I believe is on the order of once per minute). A PDC with 8 emitters can fire 8 bursts per minute, at that rate.

That has been my impression from reading the books. However; how are they aimed? Do they slew like a gun turret? If so, accuracy and targeting time will suffer.

If we incorporate an understanding that Phased Array Lasers are feasible in our impression from the book, then they are much more capable.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:This is somewhat of a repeat of a subject that was addressed quite some time ago by certain folks such as KZT, Relax and some anoymous Namelessfly.

It seems that people were precient.

https://defense-update.com/20140307_suc ... asers.html

Actually my brother in Law is part of that program. They have the 30KW bugger done, working to harden for EMP. Working on the 100KW and 200KW guys now. Can effectively cover a ship in such Lasers... Only limited by power generation.

Now for reality: Think of pressure filled balloons(not round but in lifting body shape, towed and tethered to a ship, floating a mile above, where the tether is the power cord... The range this gives in LOS... 100miles

PS: They don't really care about Water vapor in the air either as they are nearly full spectrum. Let you ponder how they do that one...

PPS: Yes, using said system for laser range finder would be absurdly easy

PPPS: The system shown in article is useless in water vapor environment(naval), but is testing for beam convergence, tracking, C&C management integration etc.

Relax wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:This is somewhat of a repeat of a subject that was addressed quite some time ago by certain folks such as KZT, Relax and some anoymous Namelessfly.

It seems that people were precient.

https://defense-update.com/20140307_suc ... asers.html

Actually my brother in Law is part of that program. They have the 30KW bugger done, working to harden for EMP. Working on the 100KW and 200KW guys now. Can effectively cover a ship in such Lasers... Only limited by power generation.

Now for reality: Think of pressure filled balloons(not round but in lifting body shape, towed and tethered to a ship, floating a mile above, where the tether is the power cord... The range this gives in LOS... 100miles

PS: They don't really care about Water vapor in the air either as they are nearly full spectrum. Let you ponder how they do that one...

PPS: Yes, using said system for laser range finder would be absurdly easy

PPPS: The system shown in article is useless in water vapor environment(naval), but is testing for beam convergence, tracking, C&C management integration etc.

Full spectrum?

Unlikely to be fiber lasers.

Free electron lasers?

There is a request for proposal issued for a conformal, actively scanned, phased array laser system.

Navy has always been a big fan of FELs.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:
Full spectrum?

Unlikely to be fiber lasers.

Free electron lasers?

There is a request for proposal issued for a conformal, actively scanned, phased array laser system.

Yes, Fiber. Many many many fiber channels. Technically they are not full spectrum(nothing other than a star is). In reality they are very close other than the super high frequencies. Only spectrum which is actively avoided are frequencies who interact with the lens material. The lens is actively cooled and actively warped for focus. Personally, I think they will eventually go with throw away lenses as one spec of dust at full power setting(research lasers not lower powered ones) turns said lens into a goo.

Someone accidentally left their laser on in a test setting(very low power) for an hour and a half. It had drilled through 3 feet of concrete and was busy burrowing its way through the earth. No one knew how deep the hole was.

Relax wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:
Full spectrum?

Unlikely to be fiber lasers.

Free electron lasers?

There is a request for proposal issued for a conformal, actively scanned, phased array laser system.

Yes, Fiber. Many many many fiber channels. Technically they are not full spectrum(nothing other than a star is). In reality they are very close other than the super high frequencies. Only spectrum which is actively avoided are frequencies who interact with the lens material. The lens is actively cooled and actively warped for focus. Personally, I think they will eventually go with throw away lenses as one spec of dust at full power setting(research lasers not lower powered ones) turns said lens into a goo.

Someone accidentally left their laser on in a test setting(very low power) for an hour and a half. It had drilled through 3 feet of concrete and was busy burrowing its way through the earth. No one knew how deep the hole was.

Everyone is defacating masonry over hypersonic missiles. An ICBM RV is Mach 20 + and MARVs can manuver just as well or better.
Missiles are more fragile than RVs.
Given robust phased array radar technology, missiles are going to become far less survivable.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Everyone is defacating masonry over hypersonic missiles. An ICBM RV is Mach 20 + and MARVs can manuver just as well or better.
Missiles are more fragile than RVs.
Given robust phased array radar technology, missiles are going to become far less survivable.

Though an RV, despite going 4x as fast, should be visible a lot sooner than a hypersonic sea skimming anti-ship missile.

A RV doing mach 20 should take roughly 25-30 seconds from 100 miles down to sea level (ignoring any atmospheric slowing but allowing for some slant range), and it should be trackable by shipboard radar even before it touches thick enough atmosphere to really start maneuvering.

A sea skimming missile might not clear a ship's radar horizon until within 17.5 miles and at hypersonic speed it'll cover that distance in 16.5 seconds. (Though of course data-link from AWACs type assets can drastically extend the detection range against low flying targets)

The question is where the laser defense's limits are.

* If the ship needs time to get the lasers spun up and on target then additional tracking time beyond the laser's effective range might outweigh how quickly the RV will be moving. (Say it takes 10 seconds from initial detection until the laser can being firing and the target that's only seen 16.5 seconds from impact has a big advantage over the one that's seen more like twice that early.

* OTOH if the laser can fire with a couple seconds of target detection but has an effective engagement range of only 9 miles then the RV is better off because it'll slash through that range in roughly 1/4 the time of the hypersonic missile so the extra time to get ready to engage isn't important.

(And that's before we consider the relative robustness of the targets; and you're right than the RV should be a tougher target for a laser to kill. Though in either case causing it to be unable to hit a target is about as good as a hard kill)

But I think the focus on hypersonic missiles is more a realpolitik judgement that those are more likely real world threats because they can be used in a non-nuclear conflict in a way that a regional or intercontinental missile's RV really couldn't (because it would be perceived as a likely nuclear attack)