From Rafael’s site: https://www.rafael.co.il/system/iron-beam/
100kW laser is nothing to joke about, but seems a good application for anti drone tasks. Fiber lasers are pretty snazzy.
100kW laser is nothing to joke about, but seems a good application for anti drone tasks. Fiber lasers are pretty snazzy.
Hamas and Hezbollah MO since the 1990s was based on bombing Israeli towns with statistical rockets and this system is supposed to reverse the cost equation (cheaper than those cheap rockets)
Today this is also used for drones though
https://eos-aus.com/defence/high-energy-laser-weapon/apollo/
I think the major difference here is that the Iron Beam is operational, as in finished trials, delivered to an armed force and actually was in active use in the previous war for more than a year
The wind up would be if that bank is depleted and they need to recharge. Delivering 100kW for a short period of time is definitely a feat.
It would by amusing to see one of these lasers mounted on an EV, possibly with a small range extender to recharge it on the go.
Can't imagine they get a very small spot at multiple km unless they use gigantic lenses or multiple independent laser focused on the same spot
That being said, probably ~10kW/m^2 is enough to overheat or disable a UAV
That would force these laser systems to point each drone until it either visibly goes up in flames or impacts the ground (which means you also need to be able to track them all the way down), otherwise you can't be sure it won't just snap back to life once you started engaging the next drone.
I don't feel like 10kw/m2 would be anywhere near useful. It's gotta be more than that.
* Stadium floodlights aren't going to instantly grill any bird that flies in front of them either, and they reach that ballpark.
If you can target it for a couple seconds with that power then you're not gonna do much, much less if it's not very absorbent
A few decades ago lasers were dismissed because they involved chemical reagents for high power and explosive capacitors for even low-power applications.
Not too much. The power delivery was doable even 15 years ago. It would have just been more expensive and heavier.
The bigger issue I believe would have been the lens and tracking capabilities. For the tracking to work you need some pretty good cameras, pretty fast computers, and pretty good object recognition. We are talking about using high speed cameras and doing object detection each frame
Not really. It took a long time for solid state lasers to make it to 100KW. That's the power level military people have wanted for two decades.
Megawatt chemical lasers are possible, and have been built. But the ground based one was three semitrailers, and the airborne one needed a 747. Plus you ran out of chemicals fairly fast.
A 100KW generator is no big deal. It's a truck Diesel engine coupled to a generator. Trailer-mounted, it can be towed with a pickup truck. It's a standard rental item for larger construction projects.
A 100KW laser is a big deal.
The big problem with this as an anti-drone weapon is that, unlike artillery shells or unguided missiles, drones can operate close to the ground, and the laser needs line of sight.
there is footage of intercepts out there. was released about half an year ago
http://panoptesv.com/SciFi/LaserDeathRay/DamageFromLaser.php
No. Most US homes are on 200 or 100A service. 200A tops out at 48kW
You won't find many home chargers that are more than 60A.
You would need 5 80 amp charger to approach 100kw but with other loads in a large house, I have seen large HVAC systems and elaborate pools with lazy rivers etc that can add up very quickly which is why they had 400 amp service.
100kw isn't really that much, a modern EV can put out 3 times that from its battery pack into the motor for short bursts and easily sustain 100kw until drained.
480v 200 amp 3 phase commercial supply can provide 100kw continuous and would be some thing used in a medium sized office building.
One home actually consuming close to 400a is pretty rare, but it's possible mainly in gas-free builds, if using things like electric tankless water heaters (a bit niche) in addition to multiple EV chargers, a range, dryer, etc.
Maybe a better way to convey that 100kW is “small” is to point out that industrial sites all around us, such as smaller datacenters, are well into the MW range.
First wave of drones get targeted, explode into clouds of chaff, second wave of drones penetrates the de-focused laser system.
Those materials do not reflect evert frequency.
When you're playing with nukes it actually is rather effective, not from a standpoint of chaff (you don't bring it) but the ionization of the nuke makes a radar blocked zone and the following missile is going very, very fast--makes a bunch of progress while the defenders are blind. It's also why we don't like nuclear anti-sub weapons--the dead zone lasts for hours, there's no way to know if you actually got the target.
But a drone is small and slow. You'll need an awful lot of drones to punch through defenses this way and the whole thing goes out the window when the laser pops drones farther back in line. And chaff only denies a small area and for a short time.
I think we're talking the second.
You’re right for ambush drones of the sort e.g. Hamas could launch. For the ones that would stream in from Iran, which Israel needed American help defending from last time, I’m not sure that’s the case.