Better question: What would this do to a manned aircraft? There is a reason there are treaties against blinding weapons.
Better question: What would this do to a manned aircraft? There is a reason there are treaties against blinding weapons.
So basically what I'm saying, this stuff is hard, and few people in the world can even verify your claim, never mind have access to the tech or AI behind it. But i'd bet with the Israelis.
Again, not sure if this turned out to be correct; but from reading reports on the ground and the lives Israel claimed it saved (and building more of them,) it seems evident he was in fact wrong.
There is a limit to how much laser power you can shoot through the air. When the threshold for breakdown is exceeded, a high density plasma is produced which is opaque to visible and infrared wavelengths and thus absorbs the laser radiation.
The moon does not have this laser power limit, but moving Tel Aviv to the moon would quite expensive and you would lose the mediterranean climate.
There is no need to use concentrated heat to heat up a tea - your target is making a tea, not making a hole in kettle.
I assume that even if you don't burn through a descending missile, merely deforming the nose cone can still cause it to go off course.
Might make rent just a little bit cheaper though.
Also your statement seems incorrect to me, there is no hard stop for lasers in regards to atmospheric effects. Air is not some sort of invincible laser armor, there is definitely loss, but air does not magically ramp up it's ability to diffuse or diffract laser light without limit. If you shot a terawatt laser at earth from orbit, it would definitely hit earth and obliterate whatever it hits (it would also do horrible things to the air on it's way down that would be like a long linear nuclear bomb). I'm not suggesting one needs anything close to a terawatt laser to have an effective military power laser, either, just giving an example of why the above statement is incorrect.
On the flip side, you'd be really far away from Iran.
it's been working 20 years ago. it's just systems were too big. you needed 2-3 tracks to supply energy to laser system, and there were delays between shots.
>For all the talk about cost reduction, have a look at what realworld laser armor costs. Painting the nosecone of a rocket white, or coating it with reflective foil costs next to nothing but is remarkably effective.
doesn't work. nosecone it's small part of rocket, laser will target midsection probably. reflective foil won't help either as it needs to be designed to reflect specific wavelength of laser iirc
The capability for lasers to counter rockets has been demonstrated over and over in the past 20-25 years. The problem has always been making the systems practical, but I guess they are getting there now.
What information are you basing this statement on?