A First for Layered Laser Defense 

That's not even the best aspect. The crazy part is perhaps using adaptive optics to correct atmospheric distortions in real-time (think 1000 updates / sec), for a moving target. AO certainly improves effectiveness and / or range at the same power level.

@@hardwareful 🤯

Space warfare

Times have changed immensely since we were kids man. It seems like these past few years have gone even faster than most

Devil scum.

Off Topic: I really don't need or want a "master". Your wording is insensitive to some of us. I was a battered wife so obviously it bothers me.

*~}`×~{}~×》》{]['(~ý~ø~ų~ИНТХЕФУЧКИНГ~ы~ə~ª~ы~щ~ø~ř~ł~đ~ПАУ~ý~œ~ų~ř~ФУЧКИНГЛЕГАЛЕТЕРНАЛунпаидаллтупесофыеыþßТО~М~Е~~С~Ч~И~Е~Н~Т~И~Ф~И~Ч~А~Л~Л~У~РИ~Г~Х~Т~Н~О~Ш~УНДЕРБОГПЕРМИТБОГЛАШЛЕГАЛЛАШ~ШИТНЕССЕДБУБОГЕТЕРНАЛЛУ~≡~я~≡~》⅛~⅞~《≡~⅛~≡》~đ~⅛~ⁿ~⅜~《≡》~Ф~У~Ч~К~И~Н~Г~⅛~þ`œ~ß~ų~ř~Ф~У~Ч~К~И~Н~Г~ы~ł~ā~⅛~ķ~ф~ł~ª~þ~ⁿ~ø~į~ß~ə~Ф~У~Ч~К~ИНГ~с~т~у~п~и~д~Ф~У~Ч~К~И~Н~Г~ц~ə~ⁿ~þ~ª~ł~ł~ý~ı~ľ~ļ~ĺ~ə~ķ~õ~ⁿ~ğ~đ~ı~ģ~ц~œ~ⁿ~ķ~ə~ý~ⁿø~ц~ⁿ~ģ~ə~ý~Е~Т~Е~Р~Н~А~Л~Л~У~Н~О~х~о~усеЕТЕРНАЛЛУНОß⅛+ⁿⁿĺЕТЕРНАЛЛУеатпоопЕТЕРНАЛЛУ~ч~а~н~н~о~т~А~Р~А~Б~И~Ч~ч~а~н~н~о~т~ЧАЛЛЕНДЕРчаннот~М~А~Т~Х~ч~а~н~н~о~т~п~ауаллтупесофдебтсЕТЕРНАЛЛУТХАТ~т~х~е~у~МУСТПАУБАСЕДОНБОГЛАШ&~Л~Е~ГАЛЛАШИТНЕССЕДБУ~Б~О~Г~СУСТЕМРЕЧОРДЕДЕТЕРНАЛЛУИНТХЕИНТЕРНЕТЧОМПУТЕРСУСТЕМчаннотА~М~Е~Р~И~Ч~А~Н~Л~А~Н~Г~У~А~Г~ЕР~Е~Ч~О~Р~Д~Е~Д~ЕТЕРНАЛЛУИНТХЕИНТЕРНЕТЧОМПУТЕРСУСТЕМШИТНЕССЕДБУБОГСУСТЕМ《≡》ФУЧКИНГ~⅛~ř~ə~ª~þ~œ~ř~ķ~ı~ⁿ~ğ~đ~ø~ц《~≡》ФУЧКИНГ~ⁿ~ı~ł~œ~ф~ªж~аханаммукетаикаслибаьикерамискинмаид~《≡》ФУЧКИНГ~ª~þ~+~ə~ı~ß~þ《≡》ФУЧКИНГшхоготаллтупесоыдебтсТОМЕШИТНЕССЕДБУБОГСУСТЕМЕТЕРНАЛЛУ《≡》ФУЧКИНГ~þ~ø~þ~ⁿ~ə~ł~ы~《≡》ФУЧКИНГ~¡~°~ы~ø~°《=》ФУЧКИНГ~о~л~д~《≠》?《≠》¿《)'!][}~×《《{}~×`{~*

Ain't it amazing how many laser experts there are on here 😆😆😆

Indeed: One desirable property of a material does not magically negate its other potentially undesirable or problematic properties. Nor does it do anything about the fabrication engineering process.

I'm going to nominate you as a test target "What do you mean Flash Gordon approaching? Open fire! All weapons! Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body"

yes its suppose to have 300 kw more than isreal's 100 kw

@Mark Smith Thanks for the detailed answer , I believe that it should be of the highest concern to have these systems be able to handle large volumes of incoming threats with very little or no delay on "powering up". Because I believe there are still some challenges with power consumtion and atmospherics.

No

it takes a while to damage the target but it reached the target immediately

@@user-jh6ik1qd7p The iron dome system mostly makes up short range surface to air missiles that are designed to shoot shoot down ballistics. Ballistics would move significantly faster than this drone and would be fired in volleys. I highly doubt this laser system or Israel's laser system would be able to destroy the missiles in time. I guess what matters the most is how fast can the laser destroy the threat and at what range could it start to effectively engage it. I would assume the system is fairly short range as is but we don't know because these numbers are not public yet. If these lasers are powerful enough to destroy the missiles within a couple seconds then the range the weapons can fire may not need to be extremely high. I would assume the closer the threat gets to the lasers source the more effective and damage it would do to the threat and this effect would increase would be more exponential as laser would significantly become less effective the further they travel

Then people would complain about the waste of drones...

The drone seems to detect when it's destroyed and launched a parachute to recover the engine and guidance section. No need to waste a million dollars per test, just destroy the nose section.

looks more like animation to me than anything else.

How does it sound advanced? Looks to me that they are just microwaving the circuits of the missiles said in easy words, impressive but ineffective against multiple hyper sonic cruisers... the enemy always uses the weakness.

What if the dines come with mirror finish?

@@Om_Namah_Shivayaa just because it’s fast doesn’t mean it’s invincible lmao

@@Om_Namah_Shivayaa if you understand photonics, lasers and pretty much any high energy "weapon* can be defeated or mostly negated. The real weapons are in charged particle accelerators, now those would make me impressed.

I hope this deters WW3.

The USA are the only ones that can

We actually use it on the civilian population

How do you think they burned Maui down they are trying to censor it but the videos are leaked and we have seen them

Time for painting the roof blue.

Missiles moving at hypersonic speeds(like ballistic missiles) wont be affected by lasers. They build up a layer of plasma that burns hotter then any army laser will ever be. While a different type of plasma for example, a plasma cutter you or I could buy from home depot burns at: "The heat of a plasma cutter can reach an impressive temperature of 25,000 degrees Celsius. To put this into perspective, it is hotter than the surface of the sun which sits at a comfortable 5,505 degrees Celsius. " This is also why hypersonic missiles can't maneuver as the plasma would burn all their control surfaces off. Pros and cons to everything. Lasers will be better used for subsonic and supersonic missiles swarms.

@@ThatCarGuy That layer of plasma is ionizing radiation that forms from friction, It’s the reason why space capsules Lose Comms for a short period during re-entry as it blocks most wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation (in this case radio waves) from being able to penetrate it. It is also the reason why NASA has been researching X-Ray based communication for re-entry back into the atmosphere to cover this small time period where comms are lost. Also Hypersonic Glide Vehicles which launch like ballistic missiles but can then travel freely at hypersonic speeds do not maneuver using flight surfaces like a traditional missile or plane but, rather by utilizing a reaction control thruster system like what you would see on a satellite in space that releases small bursts of cold gas out of various outlets on the craft’s surface to adjust and change it’s attitude and angle of attack. Also, your assumptions of temperatures of things at hypersonic speed are a bit off as it depends on speed, altitude and air density. The space shuttle regularly flew at hypersonic orbital velocities of 17,500MPH to reach orbit and it never effected the exposed control surfaces on the shuttle. Also, various types of lasers that emit at different wavelengths can and do penetrate this cloud of excited particles. The SR71 which regularly traveled at above Mach 3 never reached temperatures above 1k degrees Celsius in atmosphere

@@L33tSkE3t Any missile moving at hypersonic speeds can not maneuver. Lets do some math using a slower moving hypersonic missile. The Zircon for example, which still has control surfaces like it's fins. The Zircons top speed is mach 9 right? Converting to KM/S that is roughly 3km/s(rounding down for ease). Say you wanted to maneuver a single degree for 5 seconds at 3KM/s you would be off target 15km. Almost as much as the Chinese test just missed by. But keep in mind in a real world scenario you would need to maneuver more then a single degree to track a moving target, leading to larger misses. The space shuttle doesn't move at all. Lasers wont be able to get through plasma as stated, it burns to hot and missiles building plasma need to withstand heat. Now could you say hypersonic missiles could be shot down in their boost or midcourse phase before building up plasma, yes I would agree, but in their terminal stage it's not going to happen.

@@ThatCarGuy Sure, the chances of aiming anything at a hypersonic projectile drops off exponentially as it approaches its terminal phase due to the speed and altitude but Hypersonic glide vehicles are designed to use a traditional means of acceleration that an ICBM would but what makes Glide Vehicles the Holy Grail of Hypersonic Projectile Technology is that they can be accelerated toward hypersonic speeds and then utilize its momentum and an RCS system to control it’s flight path while combining a suite of navigational technologies to ensure target strike like GPS, Landmark, and Inertial. It will likely have not just it’s destination but pre-known locations of anti-missile systems programmed into it before launch

@@L33tSkE3t In theory yes they are the "holy grail" but do not have the means do to so mathematically. This is why the US waited so long to join the game since their is nothing really special about them. Most if not all modern BMs have GPS,INS, etc. The only way for them to maneuver would be to slow down to supersonic speeds which would then make them vulnerable to most missile defense as most IRST radars would be able to track a giant ball of plasma/heat for lack of a better word. Everything has pros and cons

you can pirouette in front a shotgun blast, and see how much good it does you.. its about energy on target, this is huge :D

@@geek211 and chrome would reflect energy.

@@sirdiealot53 absolutely reflective coatings like Chrome would reflect energy but would it reflect enough to make a difference? And I hear you if an uncoated drone takes 10 seconds to destroy and a coated drone takes 20 that plays into war games and time to kill etc.... I think it's amazing we're getting to the point where we have theater level directed energy weapons some of which that are already deployed But in terms of the future and what 2022 is supposed to be like I'm still waiting on my personal jetpack and flying cars 😄

@@geek211 You need to ensure that your coating is effective across a very large range of frequencies. There's a reason why reflective coatings against lasers have never been used.

@Marcos Martinez @sirediealot53 keep in mind that chrome paint is probably not the best radar absorber though.

Shouldn’t have any issue with fast moving objects. Light is pretty damn fast. And unless the Kalibr is flying directly perpendicular to the laser, it’s relative speed will be significantly slower

@@ashergreenfield4180 you have half the time to do the kill at mach 2, 1/4 at mach 4

@@jason.arthur.taylor if it can track it, it can destroy it.

@@ashergreenfield4180 Even perpendicular...it depends on how far away it is. A mile or miles away...it'd have plenty of time to follow target. If it flew directly over or next to...tens of seconds before its gone.

@@ashergreenfield4180 I'm also curious about a simple paint job or reflective coating. If you can reflect most of the light energy...it's useless. Could a simple paint job or reflective coatings/tape on the sensitive parts of the missile defeat it?

Work hard my guy, If you think you are working hard enough, try harder. And you may just make it 👍💯

Say goodbye to your social life and being monitored every time you talk to anyone not in your workplace

@@mk6315 sounds great! I don't have a social life.

@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle thats sad

@@aytj2073 it is but I don't have any power over anybody other than myself. Since I live in an exurb, it's more burdensome to meet up with someone I work with because my metro area is so spread out. Everyone from my highschool class is either too far away or is working, but at least I have dogs! 🤓

won't it be supplementary at first due to the operational problems in certain weather conditions?

@@ns7353 that is actually a good point. How well is it gonna perform during storms. Its interesting how the cooler weather is going to affect its effectiveness

bruh, CWIS is more effective then a laser

I honestly believe the df-21 is just fluff. It's most likely just a regular icbm. And it's only good for stationary targets. Can't hit a moving carrier

It's all about layers of defense. Way smarter to just add it to the list. Keep them all the way down to the phalanx guns

lol

Your internet connection used to be dial up. Give it Time

Face palm

Then we use weapons that are appropriate for that kind of target. This is just another tool in the toolbox.

The only thing really "great" so far was the cost to taxpayers! Not even Chinese made toys are that slow!

No chance against fast hypersonic missilles.... Even this slow cruise missile was too close to make it easier for laser, and did not perform any defensive moves. It would by much harder for laser to stay locked, if missile would perform any sharp moves, when laser would be detected.

@@mirekslechta7161The laser has the speed of light, so...

@@jamesvega779 Yeas, Laser has the speed of light...Than tell me , why it still can not catch much slover Russia´s hypersonic missilles....? That is real mystery , is not it? :)

@@acidbot666 are you going broke from your taxes?

No chance against fast hypersonic missilles.... Even this slow cruise missile was too close to make it easier for laser, and did not perform any defensive moves. It would by much harder for laser to stay locked, if missile would perform any sharp moves, when laser would be detected.

So would, (Trump Voice) China....

@@SyNx5950 I ain't worried bout it

You want them to publish the engagement/effective range of the weapon and time-to-disable after lasing it? Weapon engagement profiles are generally classified TS. Fighter squadrons in the USAF, USMC, and USN have their own compartmented rooms/vaults where this information can be discussed just on legacy weapons. For something developmental like this, only a small handful of people will have that info and are forbidden from discussing it outside of very specific settings.

@@LRRPFco52 wow that's a lot of words, too bad I ain't reading em

@@MrSmithSAH Stay out of any technical subject if you think that's a lot of words.

Just need a stromger laser thats it. You can buy weak hansheld lasers everywhere.

No chance against fast hypersonic missilles.... Even this slow cruise missile was too close to make it easier for laser, and did not perform any defensive moves. It would by much harder for laser to stay locked, if missile would perform any sharp moves, when laser would be detected.

@@mirekslechta7161 we have thadd that can kill hypersonic stuff so can patriot

@@elitewavez4768 Most of russias hypersonic stuff are not parabolic so goodluck with that.

🇨🇳🤡

face palm

@@qpunk1 not the face palm you think it is... Shield (self protection high energy laser demonstrator) is being trialled on fifth gen fighters right now.

@@StrangeLoops4 I would think it's similar to the Russian version of a IRCM which uses a laser to redirect the missile off course.

@@StrangeLoops4 Face palm is right, those systems you are describing already exist and are sensor blinders only. This system is the size of a semi trailer and no aircraft even dreams of having enough power to feed this beast. Possible? Yes, requires an entirely new fighter engine for generating said power though

yeah keep thinking that 🤣

@@qpunk1 bruh why are you responding to like every comment

​@@Jerecus why does it matter if i comment on more then one post? why are you so curious on how i use youtube?

@@qpunk1 obviously to ask mr russian z bot why he is seeking attention rather than the help he most likely needs after indulging his hourly propaganda cast

@@Jerecus clearly triggered 🤣

“This twisted game needs to be reset”

I don't know how much power this uses, bit it'll be somewhere between 100 - 300 kW. Not that easy to generate that much electric power in a fighter jet.

@@user-dv7hq2rh4g ikr I was referencing a game btw, but lockheed is developing one to destroy missiles

Would not perform at all...

it would work amazing because they will use HAARP to get rid of the clouds real quick :D

@@wolfhorschtdab5443 Dreaming ?

at those speeds itll destroy itself

@@cpte3729 Not at all, nuclear re-entry warheads can go well over a speed of Mach 24 (24x speed of sound).

That looks really cool when it gets destroyed.

Laser drone swarms are demonstrated in the simulator/game called "children of a dead earth"

Depends what altitude the LASER is at.

@@LRRPFco52 yea that too

@@LRRPFco52 altitude does nothing to change the conditions between the device and target

Won't!

@@qpunk1 Getting above the dense lower altitude band absolutely does change the intercept conditions. Rain happens at very low altitude. If I place the weapon platform in the air on an aircraft, it changes things.

It's a cruise missile dip shit. This system is designed a compact proximity range system that works as the final layer of a multi layer defense network. Cruise missiles are large weapons that will be taking out by the first 2 layers of defense. Cruise missiles will never enter the range of this weapon. This weapon is designed for smaller targets that sneak through the cracks of the first couple layers. Like small drones, small fixed wing airplanes that are flying low, small attack boats, etc. Which is why they are only designed with 100 to 150 megawatts of power. That's plenty of power to be able to rapidly destroy smaller targets. In order to destroy cruise missiles at a rapid speed you would need a 300 megawatt laser which would take a huge power source to be able to operate for a prolonged amount of time. But a separate laser program is building 300 megawatt lasers that are going to be put directly onto the Naval destroyers. And those ones will be able terribly shoot down cruise missiles up to 5 MI away. Finally if you want to be able to rapidly shoot down a ballistic missile you will need 500 megawatts of laser which they are also working on. It's part of a program where they are going to install them directly into satellites. The only reason they used a cruise missile in this demonstration was it simply prove that if they can successfully shoot down a weapon class a above the intended target class, then they won't have a issue at all when it comes time to intercept weapons from a lower class. Plus they've already had successful demonstrations shooting down every type of Target they were designed for. They just wanted to see how large of a weapon they could take down if necessary and murder spot in history for being the first ones to shoot down a cruise missile with a small laser. Literally nothing you said makes sense because all that will be handled by the first couple layers of Defense which were designed to handle the scenarios that you mentioned.

​@@-NOCAP- Thanks for the hostile comment. Note: My reply DOES NOT use expletives, or make a generalized statement that what you said makes no sense. #1) I KNOW it's a cruise missile. This was a USELESS comment, one which, along with adding a hostile 'Dipshit', got you off on the wrong foot. #2) You state: "Cruise missiles will never enter the range of this weapon." Yet, that is EXACTLY the target being tested here. #3) I have seen multiple videos of ground-to-air laser weapons tests. They have ALL been against drones and cruise missiles. So it's NOT above its' intended class' #4) Yes, I understand this weapon's utility increases when used against slower moving targets. I indicated as much in my prior comment. #5) Lockheed's laser cannon is rated at 30 KILOWATTS. You're only off by a factor of ~10,000 (30kW vs. 300MW) www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/rms/documents/directed-energy/Laser_Weapon_Systems_BRO.pdf #6) Yes, I agree, a laser in the megawatt+ range is what's needed for deployment #7) I once worked in the defense industry. Even then, a co-worker noted a ~20kW laser being tested against a static ground target 8 miles away got white hot. #8) While it makes military sense to place lasers in space, that would violate international agreements we've signed to not to weaponize space. #9) WHAT makes no sense about the defensive measures I suggested? I worked 40 years in engineering. So, be specific and ready to be challenged.

@Gregory Parrott These are low power lasers. Next gen lasers coming up is 150Kw. This is to be followed by 300Kw that's in development. Now your talking less then a second to terminate a target. And even more powerful lasers are planned. Shiny or mirrored surfaces. Go for it. This will only enhance the effect of lasers. This has already been proven out by German researchers. It's a fair weather weapon. Nope. The U.S. has found a technic that overcomes this issue. There is one issue. It is line of sight. Of course if installed on very high altitude aircraft, that line of sight is a long way off. Oh, another issue. This is at least another decade away and likely 2 decades.

@@omegaz3393 Adaptive optics can partially mitigate beam diffusion through air, water vapor, and clouds. But I question its degree of effectivity. Water droplets in particular (i.e. clouds) disperse a lot of the energy. As for surface effects, surfaces absorb, reflect, diffuse, or are transparent to light. If absorbed, energy is 'downshifted' to a lower wavelength (infrared/heat). If reflected, energy is redirected away from the target. Diffusion is mostly a form of reflection. As for reflection, what mechanism would explain your claim that a reflective surface ENHANCES the laser's effect? Lasers themselves rely on internal mirrors, and them reflecting (i.e. NOT absorbing) light before finally passing through a partially transparent mirror.

There is a reason it takes awhile to get from the TRL 4 level this is at out to TRL 8 or 9...

They would need to upgrade missiles with modern aircraft-like miniature defensive IR suites, which would require pretty much a total re-design on the missiles.

Ability of the LASER gimbaling mechanism and fire control system is faster than the missile’s ability to evade once it starts getting lased, and the LASER is going the speed of light already, so nothing you can really do about it.

@@LRRPFco52 I suspect noones going to give me specs on that gearing. Thanks for the reply.

Fairly few missiles have the technology to change course in midair, veer, and still stay on target. Cheap slow missiles (there are many subsonic cruise missiles) probably don't bother with that stuff at all.

I apologize for my aside. This is a very nice advancement.

Obviously they're not gonna tell the public how effective they are against hypersonic missiles 😏

@@donkey459 or any data about this laser they are displaying new technology!

The maneuvering isn't a problem (and could even help avoid blooming) but a limited engagement time against a rugged target is. Engaging an ICBM probably requires at least a MW.

A complex objecte that travels at hypersonic speed won't be manoeuvering much or the g forces will rip it apart. This system isn't designed to target hypersonic missiles. With current laser technology you can't get enough output to destroy a weapon that passes at such high speeds. That'll require a couple of MW at least. However sooner or later such lasers will exist. Until then interceptor missiles will have to do the job. This system is designed mainly as C-RAM.

Obviously ZERO!

No chance against fast hypersonic missilles.... Even this slow cruise missile was too close to make it easier for laser, and did not perform any defensive moves. It would by much harder for laser to stay locked, if missile would perform any sharp moves, when laser would be detected.

@@mirekslechta7161 you cannot read can you, first off these will definitely be able to defend against hypersonic threats in the future, considering the laser is moving at the speed of light (around 17466 times the speed of Mach 5) all they need to do is make the laser firing object it’s self move a little faster and make the laser stronger. Plus hypersonic weapons aren’t all that advanced as we speak. And to add, “A first…”, you did notice that right? It’s a weapon that is the first of its kind, it’s not even near to its full potential. The scientist are patriots and pioneers. It’s an amazing bit of technology wether you like it or not.

@@kanash8851 hypersonic missles are extremely fragile going at that speed

A cruise missile rotating would mean its flight control surfaces would have to be upside down. It's possible, but that comes at cost of lift which means staying level requires the use of ailerons and more drag. Adding cooling systems and heat resistant materials would increase weight, reducing performance of cruise missiles which would then make them easier to strike with conventional and cheap AAA. Or force the reduction of internal fuel, reducing range, or reducing warhead payload, reducing effectiveness.

You just need to coat them in ablative material they developed for ICBMs decades ago. Stuff can survive 15,000 degree temps coming back into the atmosphere

@@johno1544 ballistic missile warheads are very heavy because of heat shield. Not suitable for cruise missile .

That's really a bad idea , adding all those would insignificantly increase the weight causing the cruise to be slower and easier to target for already in use air defense system.

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Doesn't matter if over Mach1

I think the plan with lasers has always been to target the warhead. This was a unarmed target so no explosion

They are just showing new technology, that data will come out in the next weeks when more info is leaked!.

Wow you must someone high in command in India or something… Pretty sure this guys know what they doing is just for public content shut you ass up and don’t keep spamming

Also they didn't mention what the surface of the target was painted with. There might be a protective coating for infrared light but it was not used on this target.

Is someone attacking your country? Vietnam, Libya, Syria, maybe someone else?

Зереала ни кто неотменял особенно зеркальные покрытия😆

Could that explane the mirror coated F22?

why would anyone copy something that does not work?

I feel like you just wanted to sound smart. But anyway, the problem with reflective materials is that even if they reflect 99% of light they will still absorb some, heat up and be destroyed in that spot which enables further damage. Even 1% of light is Megewatts per m^2 of power density if you focus the laser enough. Additionally it's pretty difficult apparently to build an IR mirror.

@@sonacphotos A dielectric mirror can reflect up to 99.999% of the light incident upon it, for a narrow range of wavelengths and angles. So unless the laser is tunable and sweeping a greater range it will have the light come directly back at the laser, which will destroy it.

if so, were gonna have shiny planes flying again.

that would remove stealth since mirrors also reflect radio waves

For the last time, slapping reflective coatings on a missile won't protect it from lasers.

Let’s face it - we’re still far from missiles doing cobra maneuvers into buildings

You need serious help kid. If you up your dosage you might find you have the ability to actually complete a sentence... punctuation and all. Who's a good boy?!?! You are!

@@brianbassett4379 Whoah, calm down there. There's way worse examples of verbal diarrhea on here. Plus: his was actually a positive message. So maybe you're the one who actually needs help, just sh*tting all over innocuous comments like that ... KID. Do us all a favor, be a "good boy" and get off the internet if this is your only contribution.

Pretty much all old ideas, innovation and technology.

@@brianbassett4379 wtf is your problem dude, there is need to to say I need help. Why don’t you go touch grass or something instead of being a loser and harassing people on the internet for no reason other than to be a fucking dick. I don’t blame you since the radical left has conditioned you to scream at people who support our defense contractors.

@@snikrepak no other company as far as I know if working on laser technology with a high level of success.

What did you expect? Phasers?!

@@Gentleman...Driver not really, I guess that'll be the ultimate goal. Perhaps mount a few of these all tracking and focussing on the same target point and it'll be potent. Assuming that it doesn't require a lorry load of power per laser. I just think that better will come along. But as you say, well done on reaching this milestone.

@@TheGerbil Lets just say a laser like this could provide a little bit more protection, in addition to the already existing AA missiles, CIWS, Chaff, stealth technology/radar/infrared avoidance, electronic countermeasures and evasive actions. You can fire the laser multiple times and the theory behind this is that it wouldnt deplete your ammunition, nor would you have to fire an expensive missile on the target. Especially if the target is just a cheap drone or if its a granate. Its mostly for ship defenses, where the size of the power plant can provide enough energy to the laser system. Modern fleet combat is about overwhelming the defenses of the enemy. The US is a decade or two away from using lasers in combat situations. But you can be sure other nations would need another ten years... You dont have to just think big. Sometimes a "weaker" system can be sufficient. Its just one step after the other. Also, to point out about ablative shields. They are just that: ablative. If you point long enough the laser on this, the target will be destroyed at some point. You would need to cover the target completely so it doesnt have any weakpoints the laser could exploit. It will make a cruise missile like this heavier, and it will add to the wind resistance (and to the cost of such weapon). So it would become less maneuverable (the last thing is huge about naval warfare - some cruise missiles have build in avoidance systems to trick the enemy defenses), yet easier to intercept.

@@Gentleman...Driver let's just say that throwing a white towel at it "could provide a little bit more protection".... let's just say that's not going to cut it. If you order a steak and get a rice patty will you be satisfied :)

@@wolfhorschtdab5443 But the US military didnt order a Steak. It did order a spicy rice patty. Its just your expectation that the US military should order a steak.

Its new for them so they showed it to us

@@tripwire3992 Its not new to anybody, prototypes have existed for decades in the USA and around the world, my college designed one for these back in 2009. Only thing is this will be the first commercial laser for Defensive ready for action!

@@dudelebowski8629 i meant lockheed martin as a company not the country of the USA

I mean laser systems are on multiple nuclear ships

@@-p2349 I know that, I'm more talking about coastal defense

Probably, is a cat and mouse game. This is meant to be use in combination with other countermeasures and there is always a way to defeat it.

makes sense why it dont work 🤣

@@qpunk1 US would kick Russias ass just sayin

@@markmagness3693 is that why Russia is winning in ukraine? but anyways why would Russia have anything to do with my comment? oh triggered by my pfp typical

@@qpunk1 you're an obese incel who has been harassing this entire comment section whilst the Dorito crumbs slide off his face with a waterfall of drool

@@qpunk1 it would indicate where your support is

Conect it to bigger power grid and you’ll see how fast it melts stuff. This is just a test device using small mobile power generator. Give it nuclear reactor imput on bigger warship and things will be different. This is definitely a next generation warfare at birth

but i guess it’s more stealthy without explosions. never mess with america Cough Cough CHYNA

Using it on humans Is banned under international law. Pretty sure some will still do it, but technically, it's banned

10kilawatt - 1 megawatt

Great job at what? Spending tons of TAX money to play with Chinese made slow moving plastic toys?

Does your thesarus?

Mirror can just deflect 1-2%,so....

Atmospheric Mie scattering (from clouds and pollution) is less of an issue in the mid- and far-IR.

You cant destroy a cruise missile with a MANPAD (Man Portable Air Defense System)... Cruise missiles are hard to intercept because of their speed. Its a first for lasers, and yes, they need more development to become usable in a combat situation. First lasers we be placed for defensive purposes on navy vessels as one of many defensive systems, like CIWS, AA missiles, electronic warfare/jammers, stealth technology (radar/IR), Chaff, etc. Also the powerplant of a ship can provide the energy for a laser like this. You wont run out of ammunition, and you dont have to use costly AA missiles or even CIWS against drones or granate shells.

Infrared camera

@@sonacphotos the lenses may be that optically perfect but the atmosphere isnt. Telescopes have the same problem. They both have tried to fix the problem with adaptive optics. Clouds and fog still make these system near useless. They would shine if we placed them in orbit though but we would have to power them with nuclear power I imagine solar cells ain't going to cut it

uh no, these wont be designed as small devices, it would be too easy to counter low energy levels for the forseable future. that these will replace c-ram and other defensive weapons in LARGE defensive positions or LARGE vessels is signifigant enough.

As far as putting it on a drone...they could put it on a Aerostat for sure. It lifts 7,000lb radars easily. Of course I don't know the entire weight of this system but surely you can run a cable up the Aerostat to just the laser itself. No need in lifting it's power sources or anything.

It's not for hypersonic missiles. And hypersonic missiles are turning out to be too expensive to use. (USAir Force estimated of a hypersonic cruise missile will be around $100 million - each. And other countries will be facing similar price tags.)

You can't maintain course if you start rolling.

@@AvirupKundu I don’t think your statement is correct , how exactly rolling would prevent keeping the direction . Probably could shorten the range , since the object doesn’t fly in the most efficient way it is designed to fly.

No chance against fast hypersonic missilles in any weather... Even this slow cruise missile was too close to make it easier for laser, and did not perform any defensive moves. It would by much harder for laser to stay locked, if missile would perform any moves, when laser would be detected. No chance in cloudy weather..., or rain.

Lockheed martin and most aerospace defense companies have defense and space sectors, if you would like to work for these companies you would need some sort of engineering degree and for their space division a aerospace engineer division

physics, chemistry, engineering, computer science. something in that gamut.