Posted on 02/17/2014 7:45:26 PM PST by blam
The US Navy Is Ready To Deploy A Futuristic Laser Weapon That's Been Likened To 'Star Wars'
David Sharp, Associated Press
Febuary 16,2014
BATH, Maine (AP) — Some of the Navy's futuristic weapons sound like something out of "Star Wars," with lasers designed to shoot down aerial drones and electric guns that fire projectiles at hypersonic speeds.
That future is now.
The Navy plans to deploy its first laser on a ship later this year, and it intends to test an electromagnetic rail gun prototype aboard a vessel within two years.
For the Navy, it's not so much about the whiz-bang technology as it is about the economics of such armaments. Both costs pennies on the dollar compared with missiles and smart bombs, and the weapons can be fired continuously, unlike missiles and bombs, which eventually run out.
"It fundamentally changes the way we fight," said Capt. Mike Ziv, program manager for directed energy and electric weapon systems for the Naval Sea Systems Command.
(snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Place of origin: United States
Specifications
Weight: 27.5 tons
Length: 30 ft (9.1 m)
Width: 10 ft 4 in (3.15 m)
Height: 10 ft 8 in (3.25 m)
Crew: 6 (2 Loaders, Gunner, Assistant Gunner, Commander, Driver)
BEAUTIFUL machine.
Bump.
Crew assisted but a tough SOB.
Some **** just works.
I think these laser weapons have been developed primarily to use against the missile threat. Easy to track incoming missiles once they get within a few tens of miles. Ready, aim, fire and goodbye missile. Gotta love it.
Why all the flames?
That one does. It really warms, Ah say, warms the cockles of mah heart (Foghorn Leghorn) to see that USA made weaponry. GO USA!!
I wonder too.
It’s been working for decades.
That's good news: it's reliable and STURDY!
Actually a high power laser weapon with short cycle time (high pulse rate) would be nearly ideal for this. The virtually "zero time of flight" of the shot greatly simplifies the intercept solution. You get nearly instantaneous feedback on the success or failure of the engagement (instead of waiting while an anti-missile missile flies out). Multiple shots means you almost never run out of ammo. The only downside is that it probably is on a trainable mount - meaning you can only engage one threat at a time and then have to wait a short amount of time to re-orient the mount before engaging the next. Anti-missile missiles can fly out to all points of the compass simultaneously and a phased array radar can direct them all. So mostly in the plus column, some downside.
...I don't get many chances to discuss the eloquence of Foghorn leghorn.
They need lots of electrical power. The article claims only one ship in the fleet has enough. How about the carriers??? I’d think their nuclear power plants could make enough. And since they would be the main target for the incoming missiles they should be willing to spare some juice for defensive weaponry. I presume more than one would be needed to provide 360 degree coverage. I’m don’t know how much space they’d need nor how they’d be integrated into the rest of the design, but it may be worth some thought by naval architects.
That's one of the problems with these weapons. The high heat generated tends to destroy the rails. Electricity converted to mechanical energy tends to create heat. Lots of YouTube videos on these weapons tests, lots of flames. The designers will get a handle on reliability at some point so the weapon lasts longer than a few firings.
2520 meters per second = 1.566 miles per second = 5,637 miles per hour.
FYI, a molniya orbit requires only 3,335 mph. Geostationary orbit requires 6,935 mph (low Earth orbit requires at least 15,430 mph, though).
"The “fire” is plasma, generated by the huge electrical current as it vaporizes the rear portion of the projectile (or more accurately, the armature that pushes the projectile forward).
The projectile rides between two rails. Two parts. The front part is the actual projectile, and the rear part is the “Armature”, which is like a carriage that holds the projectile and pushes it forward. The armature completes the circuit between the rails, and may even be designed so that the electrical current vaporizes part of it (probably the part that would touch the rails), creating a conductive metal plasma that completes the circuit. That would cut down on friction, compared to having the armature physically touching the rails as it moves."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.