Hacker News Reader

Comment by Miraste | Hacker News Reader

Sounds like that could be gotten around by using multiple lasers.

Multiple beams creates a different problem. Say your beam is 1cm across and you are aiming at a 30cm target. All your energy is in that 1cm. You don't much care where in that 30cm it hits so long as it burns through. But with two lasers, to be effective, each beam needs to hit the same sport on the target. Instead of a 30cm target, laser #2 now has to hit the 1cm beam of the first laser.

That, or also you get a shotgun effect with different damaged areas in a single target. Increasing the probability of destruction with less powerful lasers.

Those lasers do not burn through. #2 does not have to hit exactly the same place as #1 is heating up to boil electronics. No idea, what is meant under lasers in article, but what they were describing could be even be concentrated radio microwaves to fry electronics.

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.

This could be relevant for UAV's, but this system would defend against missiles that are purely ballistic -- no electronics to fry.

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.

These are unguided rockets used as terror weapons against civilian targets. They're not very accurate in the first place, so even if a defense system deflects a rocket slightly it can still land in a populated area. I suspect what they're actually trying to do is cause enough airframe damage to make the rocket break up in flight.

If there are electronics, the sort of electronics that run inside missiles arent the sort to be boiled. Its a pretty harsh environment. And with unguided rockets, most of the stuff fired as isreal, there simply arent any electronics.

Israel is very concerned with the guided stuff that Hezbollah backed by Iran has been amassing the last decade.

They also need to be in phase

Set to funk funk

Reply on news.ycombinator.com