Print 70 comment(s) - last by Smilin.. on May 21 at 6:40 PM

Soon lasers may go from the realm of science fiction to real battlefields.  (Source: LucasFilm Ltd.)
Next-gen solution will supplement today's projectile-based auto-turrets

Perhaps it's the indelible "cool" factor of having a weapon that long has been a dear dream of the science fiction agency.  Perhaps it's practical considerations like range and time to target impact.  But for whatever the reasons, the U.S. armed forces and its contractors remain dogged in their pursuit of real-life laser weapons.

I. Projectile-Equipped Auto-Turrets Pave the Way For Laser Defenses

The current line of thought is to use lasers onboard sea ships and on armored vehicles as automated turrets capable of creating a shield against incoming hostile projectiles.  While ineffective against solid slugs, high powered lasers could successfully detonate more-destructive explosion ordinances -- rockets, mortars, and explosive shells.

Col. Pete Newell, the head of the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force, says that such systems are crucial for defending locations like small outposts in the mountains of Afghanistan from deadly rocket and mortar fire, which are often directed over rocky outcroppings.  States Col. Newell, "No radar can find that."

For now, the Army is looking to field defensive auto-turrets to target such projectiles.  Key to that effort is the Counter-Rocket and Mortar (C-RAM) Land-based Phalanx Weapon System (LPWS).  Developed primarily by the U.S. Navy, but also fielded on land, the C-RAM system has been relatively effective, considering that it's not far from being a glorified tech demo.

Phalanx C-RAM
Proven effective in real-world deployments, the Phalanx C-RAM auto-turret could be enhanced by anti-ordinance lasers. [Image Source: PopGun Reviews]

While the C-RAM's "kill sheet" is relatively small -- 170 mortar and rocket attacks in the battlefield since 2005 -- the Navy says it has proved equally valuable for its early detection capabilities, helping warn of over 2,000 attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last seven years.

The life-saving system is hauled on a trailer.  Precise details are scarce, but it is known to be a scaled down version of the Navy's Phalanx Close-in Weapon System (CIWS).  The sea-based Phalanx CIWS packs a 20mm M61A1 Gatling gun capable of firing between 3,000 to 4,500 high-explosive self-destruct rounds per minute at incoming enemy munitions.

II. More Turrets Incoming

Top defense contractor, Northrop Grumman Corp. (NOC), in February scored a $132M USD contract to install and sustain several of the LPWS units at bases in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The lead designer of the sea-based CIWS, Raytheon Comp. (RTN) (which acquired the project as part of its recent acquisition of General Dynamics), has also scored an estimated $78.3M USD contract to develop the LPWS/CIWS successor, dubbed the Accelerated Improve Intercept Initiative (AI3).

Steve Bennett, project leader for the AI3 says it will be "saving soldiers' lives by 2015."  He comments that the refined anti-projectile system will leverage "technologies from the Sidewinder, Avenger and Small Diameter Bomb II programs as well as leveraging program and IR&D efforts from our key suppliers."

III. Multiple Laser Solutions Vie for Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy

But what about the lasers?

Many commanders remain hopeful that lasers will be a crucial part of future campaigns, as do defense contractors like Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. 

In the air realm The Boeing Comp. (BA) is showing off its advanced YAL-1 Airborne Laser (ABL) system [1][2], a system designed to ward off enemy rockets and even potentially shoot down incoming ballistic (nuclear) missiles.  The chemical laser system has been in the works since 1980s, which could be seen as either a source of optimism given the long string of improvements or pessimism given that it's still not fully battle ready three decades later.

Boeing ABL
Boeing's ABL has been stuck for three decades in development purgatory. [Image Source: Boeing]

Boeing has also showed off a second design, geared towards gunship use, dubbed the Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL).  Packed aboard a Hercules C-130H gunship, Boeing is targeting a power of 100 to 300 kW laser with up to 100 shots.  It hit a stationary Humvee in 2009 tests, burning a hole in its front hood.  The status of the project is unclear, with little news since that high profile success.

At sea, Northrop Grumman is leading efforts with its Maritime Laser Demonstrator (MLD).  Armed with a $98M USD contract, Northrop Grumman is aiming to install 100-kilowatt lasers on ships.  Last April the system scored a "kill shot" on a small ship, swaying in a choppy sea.  The U.S. Navy is also working on free electron lasers, hoping to produce an in-house one megawatt design, a systems so powerful that it could penetrate armored ships.

Raytheon is working on a rival system.  It has paired the aforementioned Phalanx's artificial intelligence with a battery of six 32 kilowatt lasers to form the Laser Weapon System (LaWS), which shot down four unmanned aerial vehicles in 2010 testing.

IV. HEL MD Looks to Give Enemies Land Projectiles Hell

The latest efforts in laser weapons have been to bring a laser-endowed auto-turret system onto land.  Boeing is working on a contract with the Army’s Space & Missile Defense Command to produce the High Energy Laser Mobile Demonstrator (HEL MD).  A prototype unit was successfully integrated onboard a Oshkosh HEMTT A4 vehicle last summer and underwent low-power testing in the fall and winter.

Boeing DES
Boeing is developing laser war-wagons. [Image Source: Boeing]

Assuming the Army bites on a follow-on contract, Boeing will next engage in field testing in 2013.  Blaine Beardsley, HEL MD program manager at Boeing, spoke to Defense News about the program. 

He emphasized its virtually-unlimited "magazine" and early succes in tracking targets, remarking "[The system was] very successful in acquiring and tracking the object and putting the beam on it.  [Y]ou can drive it out to any location and emplace it quickly and be able to set it up with full 360-degree coverage.  Even while you're utilizing the magazine and engaging targets, you’re charging that magazine."

The new system's test targets included 60 mm and 120 mm rounds.

V. Laser Weapons -- Wither Art Thou?

It's reasonable to take such claims with a degree of skepticism, or even pessimism, given that laser weapons have been a regular promise since the 1980s.

But the advent of high-power solid-state lasers -- a recent development, may prove the salvation of the promising future-weapon.  Unlike gas lasers, which often require toxic chemicals and costly-charges, the solid state laser offers a virtually unlimited number of shots, as long as you can keep it powered and cooled.

Mark Gunzinger, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, says lasers have the advantage of instant kills -- crucial for anti-ordinance systems.  He remarks, "You don’t have to wait for a kinetic weapon to fly to a target — it goes at the speed of light."

Storm trooper shooting laser
Real-life laser weapons may soon become a reality. [Image Source: LucasFilm Ltd.]

But even if the state of the art can be advanced to the point of having limitless shots and reliable target striking, traditional projectile weapons will still be needed, he argues, "Directed energy weapons can't completely replace kinetic defenses. They’re complementary.  You need both of them because lasers have limitations in bad weather and so forth."

Ultimately the best counter to the laser -- a crucial future weapon -- may be yet another future weapon -- the rail gun.  By delivering slugs at hypersonic speeds, future rail guns' ordinance may be too fast for a laser defense system to hit.  And even if the laser system was fast enough to react, it would likely be unable to harm the projectile, as rail guns aim to deliver solid slugs with equivalent destructive force to explosive munitions.  The laser need to be able to set off an explosive in order to "kill" an incoming round -- for now, at least.

Source: Defense News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Mirror, Mirror...
By tamalero on 5/15/2012 4:34:44 PM , Rating: 2
Think on this for a second..

a) how much energy needs to be able to fully destroy a missile (aka, make the laser effective)

now think this:

b) how much constant power the laser beam will fire to the target.
c) how much % of the energy is reflected by that anti laser compound.

now imagine this.. you only have X amount of time to destroy the missile.. your Phalanx Laser system can fire an Y output power per second.
if the reflective coating manages to protect the missile and reflect most of the energy during this critical approaching part.. your phalanx system either has to rely on the usual minigun weaponry.. or it will be DESTROYED.

now you have also take into consideration.. CLOUDS.. RAIN..

each of your replies to other people in here...almost makes it sounds like the laser will always hit the target with 100% full perfect power output.

RE: Mirror, Mirror...
By Smilin on 5/18/2012 5:22:53 PM , Rating: 2
Current missles aren't designed with any form of defense against lasers but that will change. Just putting a longer empty nose cone on would help a great deal. Reflectivity isn't going to be a defense as well discussed above.

For clouds and rain you're talking about something that can vaporize metal so it will "tunnel" through falling rain pretty easily. It will indeed degrade the output some considering you'll be shooting through 10-20 *miles* of rain.

With the ones they are putting on Phalanx lasers I'm don't believe they have the adjustable lenses like on the Boeing YAL-1. With that in mind I think the sheer distance and air distortion is going to have a bigger impact than rain. A Phalanx laser will only reach 100% perfect power on the target once the target has gotten pretty close.

I'm not sure how long a laser would have to remain on target but there is plenty of time available (for a single missle):
-The Phalanx guns on the Carrier I worked on were about 75' off the water.
-Consider a skimming missle that has an altitude of 50'
-That gives about 22 miles worth of line of sight
-The incoming missle will be detected beforehand (search radars are some 150+ feet up) and illuminated with fire control radar the moment it breaks horizon
-The russian KH-35 is typical of an anti-ship missle it would need to defend against. As with many it's turbojet and subsonic at about 0.8 mach.
-22miles at 0.8mach gives about 130 seconds to shoot down the target (check my math on that...having watched mach1 flight that seems long)

In a battle you could count on two Phalanx guns being on the side of the ship where the attack is coming from. Consider about 100 incoming missles spaced to arrive within a 30 second period. There will be more but you can count on fighters and battlegroup cruisers to handle some.

So (130sec+30sec)/100missles * 2 guns .. Assuming you could magically hop target to target with no delay that would give 3.2 seconds per missle.

I don't think that would cut it. You're going to have to supplement with the sparrow III and vulcan based phalanx guns or you'll have a sunk carrier.

The big limitation you didn't mention: Accuracy. Sure the laser is 100% accurate but the radar you're using to track the target with isn't. Having the laser miss here and there or otherwise dance around on the target seems it would be a problem. That missle is coming head on and is 1-2' in diameter max. That's a small target 22 miles out.

Having watched the traditional vulcans fire it's like a damn shotgun and each "pellet" is an explosive incidiary round particularly good at killing fragile fuel laden aircraft. They don't have a 22 mile range but will certainly take out things closer.

Fact is folks smarter than us intarweb know-it-alls are putting these things into service. They'll work.

"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook

Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki