You haven’t been paying attention.
Iron Beam systems are already road mobile, and they are a half generation behind USA HEL systems.
So mobility isn’t the problem.
HEL and Iron Beam systems take out missiles and artillery shells already today, which is different from knocking out a fighter jet (mass, profile, maneuverability, beam detection, etc.).
So pointing out that current airborne lasers are unlikely to take out another fighter jet means either that you aren’t paying attention, or that you are being deliberately deceptive. Your choice.
NOW...for those paying attention, getting a road-mobile laser system from today (hint: they are already deployed in the field, i.e. “they exist”) into the air by 2030 is a manageable challenge...and something that would probably be for defensive measures such as knocking out anti-aircraft missiles and ack-ack shells.
Noteworthy is that everyone keeps saying that such fighter jets would have to carry other munitions. Perhaps air to air missiles. Perhaps small smart-bombs.
Regardless, mounting *existing* mobile weapons systems onto aircraft has been done ever since the first Browning was loaded onto a Wright Flyer over a century ago.
Prepping an aircraft design today for such a feat by 2030 hardly seems like “science fiction” ... unless you haven’t been paying attention.
Agreed. Advanced systems already in the field. And black program development at any given time always seems like science fiction. The leading edge of classified development is probably well beyond these issues.
I have been paying attention. Your flying laser will be a big huge, heavy, expensive, ineffective boondoggle. We are not currently out there replacing bullets and missiles for lasers. We do use lasers for lots of purposes now. But to knock a fighter out of the sky or a to disable a tank, you need a long extension cord. Or a huge battery and you get one shot.
I am sure there is a general and a congressman out there who is gullible enough to ok this thing.