#ODIN 

When the Laser passes 1 Megawatt output, then I'll take notice.

@@briananthony4044 don't ruin kids dream)

@Дмитрий Телпиз. Good to know lasers can't yet defeat hypersonic missiles. B-1s reportedly can carry up to 31 AGM-183 mach 20 missiles. Meaning just three B-1s loaded with 31 mach 20 missiles EACH could sink the entire Russian surface fleet. Glad to know nobody can stop Mach 20 missiles.

@Brian Anthony. It takes considerably less power to potentially dazzle the sensors of any incoming missile.

@@chuckhooks6621 the AGM-183 that fails to ignite its boosters and separate from pylons? sweet burgerpatriot dreams) i also laughed about those "mach 20" )

When I was a young kid, I thought Star Wars was reality.

I remember the first laser tests in the Caribbean Weapons range back in 1991 when I was a young Sailor. We have had this tech for 30 years. They are only now revealing it to the public.

Then I was working with lasers when you were a kid. Yeah, we are getting old.

The military lasers don't go pew pew though. It's invisible beam is only noticeable by the sizzling on target.

But today lasers are still bullshit, still good only for rangefinding and target designation!

He was. How can someone not know who Vice Admiral James Stockdale was? Medal of Honor decorated and a modern Stoic who endured years in the Hanoi Hilton in the beginning.

He's been playing to much world of Warcraft.

what is ASAT？

@@BC-sr3gg anti-satellite weapon.

I wonder if they will use ultra capacitors because i dont think even the nuclear reactors could provide enough energy for a laser to take out a satellite. But anyway im not a laser scientist so i dont know what im talking about.

@@hypersonicmonkeybrains3418 I am also skeptical that a surface-based laser would be used for ASAT missions. It would be more efficient to mount such a weapon on a satellite, a space plane like X-37, or at least a high-altitude aircraft.

@HypersonicMonkeyBrains. The goal is not to destroy satellites from the land/sea with lasers but to "dazzle" and thus degrade/damage satellites at least in low Earth orbit. China already apparently has ground-based lasers capable of doing just that. Quote: "The Defense Intelligence Agency warned in January 2019 that China likely will field in 2020 a ground-based laser weapon that can counter low-orbit space-based sensors. By the mid-to-late 2020s it may field higher power systems that could damage the structures of non-optical satellites." spacenews.com/op-ed-u-s-satellites-increasingly-vulnerable-to-chinas-ground-based-lasers/ That is why I believe US Virginia subs and the Ford-class are being prepared to be mobile, survivable ASAT weapons whose lasers are powered by nuclear reactors. It was widely reported that lasers were being installed in the photonics masts of the Virginias two years ago.

Stop screwin screwing around Navy . You need Gigwatt lasers not MW.

Dr evil had this technology 20 years ago

@@theflanman420420 ah yes, the dreaded "Allen Parsons project." "Unless you give me.... one MILLION dollars."

They did have the one that worked on Boeing aircraft but it was to expensive to operate

@@Blackreaper95 yes but I think theyre developing a pod mounted laser weapons system, particularly for the F 16(V)s , I think

@@mikeneufield2855 I believe they are

@@Blackreaper95 I would think it was more a proof of concept. They are already in the process of upgrading the F 35 which points in that direction.

YAL-1

So would our enemies....

Would this laser stop Hypersonic missiles?

Make sure you ask for one when it's raining.

@@willwozniak2826 This is a dazzler meant to blind, not destroy. And no lasers do not work on hypersonic missiles do to the fact hypersonic missiles get a layer of plasma which burns hotter then lasers. It burns so hot it can disable the missile, it's called plasma blackout. Theoretically they could be shoot down in their boost or midcourse phase before reaching hypersonic speeds, which would just be hard to do as only the US has a midcourse phase interceptor or you would need to be near the nation that shot it off to destroy it in it's boost phase. That being said, unless you are at extreme close range hypersonic missiles will never be used on ships or any maneuverable target do to the fact hypersonic missiles can not maneuver.

Here is the USS ponce 50kw laser not dazzler test. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-sbjXXRfwrHg.html&ab_channel=U.S.Navy

Not by a long shot. Bullets are rain proof.

Laser weapons are probably always going to exist as the third CIWS option behind missiles and guns. They have some useful qualities, but too many downsides to replace existing systems. ODIN is ultimately still a very polished and developed science experiment. 20mm Phalanx isn't going anywhere.

@@ultraman5168 If anything, I'd figure Phalanx CIWS likely upgrade from 20mm to 30mm with major overhaul upgrade for sensors package.

This is a dazzler. It blinds optical weapons not shoots them down. It lacks the power to destroy.

Ok good I wasn't the only one

I have Fallout paused while I watch this rn, not even joking.

This is mostly a countermeasure against optical sensors. When they're more mature, laser weapons are going to take up mostly short range weapons against helicopters, drones, small boats, rockets, cannon shells, and basic missiles. Long range supersonic and hypersonic missiles will be too big and fast to counter with lasers, that will remain the job of electronic countermeasures and defensive missiles. USN has focused on multi-layer missile defense for a long time and is very good at it. Offensively, the collapse of the USSR as a rival and the focus on upgrading fighters lead to allowing some important missiles to go obsolete, though that is quickly changing. Currently the best offensive options in the fleet are the new Naval Strike Missile (NSM), which can be fired from the decks of surface ships like the old Harpoon missiles and eventually F-35 weapon bays, and the Long Range Anti Ship Missile (LRASM) which is designed for older fighters, heavy bombers, and the large vertical launchers of US cruisers and destroyers. The upgraded Block V Tomahawk missiles also provide a high volume long range offensive capability, as the US has several thousand of these missiles already avalible, while stockpiles of NSM and LRASM are still being established. Going into the future the US is also developing two joint service hypersonic missiles. First will be an air-launched hypersonic missile that will go into service first with F-15s, B-52s, and B-1 bombers, but could eventually arm most Airforce and Navy planes. This weapon is titled AGM183 ARRW and it is almost ready for full production. There is also a joint Army/Navy hypersonic missile, which will be launched by the Army from wheeled launch vehicles, and by the Navy from the Zumwalt stealth destroyers and later from nuclear submarines.

This is a dazzler meant to blind incoming drones sensors rendering them useless. And no lasers do not work on hypersonic missiles do to the fact hypersonic missiles get a layer of plasma which burns hotter then lasers. It burns so hot it can disable the missile, it's called plasma blackout. Theoretically they could be shoot down in their boost or midcourse phase before reaching hypersonic speeds, which would just be hard to do as only the US has a midcourse phase interceptor or you would need to be near the nation that shot it off to destroy it in it's boost phase. That being said, unless you are at extreme close range hypersonic missiles will never be used on ships or any maneuverable target do to the fact hypersonic missiles can not maneuver. I can post the Russian patent stating so if you would like. You would need around 300KW minimum, preferably in the MW class to even think about shooting down missiles(sub and supersonic) as they are built to resist heat, sub and supersonic missile can maneuver away from the laser, and while the laser itself is fast as light, it's turret it's mounted to isn't can can only rotate so many degrees. Nothing is perfect, everything has pros and cons.

@@ThatCarGuy Not sure if Russian hypersonic missile developers had solved for terminal phase manuveurability to counter close-in defense systems but I believe that they had recent events definitely incorporated multi-hypersonic vehicle deployment warheads similar to the nuclear MIRVs warheads that will likely have multiple decoys as well now instead of warhead with single hypersonic glide vehicle atop the booster assembly. Which RUS patent are you referring to? And all new USN laser weapon systems are MW class at very least and if I recall correctly usually at 150-300 MW minimum; a lot of upgrades to platforms across fleet recently after T&E phase per press release if my memory serves correct.

​@@AM-dc7pv No active US laser is in the MW class. No laser in the world is yet. Most are less then 100kw. "The 60 kW High Energy Laser and Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) will be tested on an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer in 2021" "In 2014, the U.S. began field testing a 30 kW directed-energy weapon it calls the AN/SEQ-3 Laser Weapon System (LaWS) onboard USS Ponce while deployed in the Persian Gulf. The tests went well and the system was declared operational" "High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS) A counter-RAM aircraft or truck-mounted laser under development by General Atomics under a DARPA contract. 150 kilowatt goal. Uses a lasing medium immersed in an index matched coolant." "Free-electron laser (FEL) technology is being evaluated by the US Navy as a candidate for an antiaircraft and anti-missile directed-energy weapon. The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility's FEL has demonstrated over 14 kW power output. Compact multi-megawatt class FEL weapons are undergoing research. On 9 June 2009 the Office of Naval Research announced it had awarded Raytheon a contract to develop a 100 kW experimental FEL" and so on. We are far away from MW class lasers. Hypersonic missiles can not maneuver, they have to shut their engines off and/or detach from them, once their engine is off can not maneuver, can lose stability and even self destruct all according to Russais own patent on scram/ram jet engines source below. If it could some how maneuver it's moving so fast it would be off target and the metal would shred causing the missile to self destruct like the patent states. Take the zircon for example, it's top speed is mach 9, covert that to KM/S that's 3km/s. Now imagine moving a single degree for 5 seconds at 3km/s, you would be off target 15km. Keep in mind you would move more then a single degree. This is why ballistic/hypersonic missiles having such large CEPs. And yes the Zircon is a ballistic missile as scram/ram jets need high altitude to function. "Russian patent number 2579409 relates to the field of rocket technology, and more specifically to hypersonic cruise missiles equipped with a hypersonic ramjet engine. The invention describes a method of application and device hypersonic cruise missile (CRPD), allowing to solve the problem of performing a combat mission to destroy ground and surface targets of such a missile. The described invention is designed to maximize the combat potential of the CMP with the scramjet. The design mode for the scramjet are high-altitude cruise conditions while maintaining the estimated cruise speed, and the need to reduce the altitude and flight speed creates difficult technical problems due to the fact that: an engine designed to perform a hypersonic mid-flight at high altitude is not able to continue to work at low-altitude trajectory sections associated with a decrease in the flight number M, hence, the rocket must approach the ground or surface target with an inactive engine; characteristics of sustainability and controllability of CRPD with inactive scramjet significantly deteriorate, loss of stability becomes possible; there is also a danger of destruction of the scramjet design due to the increase in pressure in the flow part of the engine while reducing the CMP from the march height before hitting the target."

lasers do not work on hypersonic missiles do to the fact hypersonic missiles get a layer of plasma which burns hotter then lasers. It burns so hot it can disable the missile, it's called plasma blackout. Theoretically they could be shoot down in their boost or midcourse phase before reaching hypersonic speeds, which would just be hard to do as only the US has a midcourse phase interceptor or you would need to be near the nation that shot it off to destroy it in it's boost phase. That being said, unless you are at extreme close range hypersonic missiles will never be used on ships or any maneuverable target do to the fact hypersonic missiles can not maneuver. I can post the Russian patent stating so if you would like. The US has the fastest hypersonic missile in the world called the ground based midcourse defense capable of mach 33, missiles will still be best used on hypersonic missiles.

@@ThatCarGuy I didn't know we had a hypersonic missle.

@@jamesaddler2426 We do We have since the 70's. Google aim 54 it flew on the F14s. More info on the ground based midcourse defense straight from the US military page. "The GBI consists of a 3-stage solid rocket boost vehicle which can place it's payload of an Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle outside the earth's atmosphere. In order to do this the missile must reach an escape velocity of more than 6.9 miles per second. This hypersonic speed is several times what a 7.62mm bullet travels leaving the muzzle of a gun. To put it another way, it reaches a speed of approximately Mach 33."

Aren't ships still incorporated with a small layer of blister armor or that's long since phased out now?

@@AM-dc7pv Depending on the Navy and design, small warships (Destroyers and Frigates) have no armor to Kevlar around vitals. Major warships like Nimitz Class aircraft carriers are heavily armored and have torpedo fuel, water and ballast tanks around vital machinery spaces.

I doubt they'd replace a significant portion of Phalanx guns with ODIN. Output can be increased in later iterations, the important milestone is fitting a laser weapon into the same footprint on a ship as the existing Phalanx and SeaRAM weapons.

See 2:35, the other part of the system is a high energy laser.

Probably too heavy.

Here is a weak 50kw laser not dazzler shooting down small commercial like drones and small boat platform. They haven't released videos to the public of a test for ODIN. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-tyUh_xSjvXQ.html&ab_channel=CNN

Right I noticed that right when he said it

All new USN laser systems are megawatt class.

You forgot MUH-HAHAHA.

welcome from your friend POSEIDON STATUS 6 NUCLEAR ARMED TORPEDO🤣

im pretty sure that the navy is getting a more powerful laser in a few years

@@GIVI727 why would you want to provoke a bunch of slant-launched Trident missiles? Or something really wild like nuclear armed X-37? Chill.

@@ultraman5168 dude remeber no one is provoking YOU, you the one whis provoking russia and china just to stay IN THE #1! and tthats not gonna be easy dude.. They got NUKES also and thousands of them😂 You can keep saying DUDE WE ARE THE USofA we are the #1super power we have this we have that our military budget is 10x bigger than them" but the only aswer is DUDE THEY HAVE THOUSANDS OF NUKES ALSO NOT JUST YOU! 😂

@@GIVI727 yeah a non functional piece of crap that is only good for poisoning the sea. Like all Russian equipment great at killing civilians, just ask the relatives of the MH-17 occupants. And please learn English before you start reacting in it.

No such EMP weapon has been developed as far as I know. The only weapons capable of accelerating particles fast enough to create a sizable EMP are nuclear and why would you waste a nuclear bomb on an aircraft carrier?

lasers do not work on hypersonic missiles do to the fact hypersonic missiles get a layer of plasma which burns hotter then lasers. It burns so hot it can disable the missile itself which is actually a downside, it's called plasma blackout. Russian propaganda tried calling this a plasma shield. Now theoretically they could be shoot down with a laser in their boost or midcourse phase before reaching hypersonic speeds, which would just be hard to do as in it's midcourse phase it would be in space and lasers can't reach that high in altitude yet, and for downing in the boost phase you would need to be near the country firing it off, putting you in range of being a target. This is why missiles will work best and only the US has a midcourse phase interceptor. That being said, unless you are at extreme close range hypersonic missiles will never be used on ships or any maneuverable target do to the fact hypersonic missiles can not maneuver. I can post the Russian patent stating so if you would like. The US has the fastest hypersonic missile in the world called the ground based midcourse defense capable of mach 33, missiles will still be best used on hypersonic missiles.

@@ThatCarGuySm 6 missile system failed recently and also did not work well in defeting salvo of missile america also does propaganda

What battleship? Who has battleships? Anyway a laser, given enough power, could shoot down the shells in flight.

It's to weak to down missiles, and is meant to blind sensors rendering drones useless, you need around 300kw minimum to shoot down sub and supersonic missiles, and even then, that's still low and preferably want to be in the MW class.

@@ThatCarGuy All the laser systems being fielded by US mil are MW class.

@@AM-dc7pv ​ No US laser is in the MW class. No laser in the world is yet. "The 60 kW High Energy Laser and Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) will be tested on an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer in 2021" "In 2014, the U.S. began field testing a 30 kW directed-energy weapon it calls the AN/SEQ-3 Laser Weapon System (LaWS) onboard USS Ponce while deployed in the Persian Gulf. The tests went well and the system was declared operational" "High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS) A counter-RAM aircraft or truck-mounted laser under development by General Atomics under a DARPA contract. 150 kilowatt goal. Uses a lasing medium immersed in an index matched coolant." "Free-electron laser (FEL) technology is being evaluated by the US Navy as a candidate for an antiaircraft and anti-missile directed-energy weapon. The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility's FEL has demonstrated over 14 kW power output. Compact multi-megawatt class FEL weapons are undergoing research. On 9 June 2009 the Office of Naval Research announced it had awarded Raytheon a contract to develop a 100 kW experimental FEL" and so on. We are far away from MW class lasers.

You are correct. Lasers are attractive for their economical advantage over cannons and missiles, as well as their ability to engage a target the instant it breaks the horizon and/or enters the effective radius, but you describe a major reason why they will be limited to supplementing existing weapons.

Even lower KW lasers burn hot enough any condensation in the air would evaporate in seconds. It's displacing photons so fast condensation stands little chance. The issue now is with the lower KW lasers we have their range is so minimal it makes them a negligible weapon in battle. The 50kw class that was on the USS Ponce had around a 1 mile range. We need MW class lasers to be effective against sub and supersonic missiles along with fighter aircraft all designed to handle high temperatures and do so at safe ranges for our crew. Getting the burn times down is a huge issue. You can't sit on a target for 15-30 seconds+ and expect good results in a swarm attack. I also don't know if it will be possible to create lasers that burn hotter then plasma to be able to shoot down hypersonic missiles in the future, as plasma burns much hotter then lasers, and plasma is even a hypersonic missiles own issue as it can burn so hot it can cause something called plasma black out with disables the missile itself. Also to take into account hypersonic missiles can not maneuver in their terminal stage and would almost never be used on ships unless the ship was in short range. Nothing is perfect everything has pros and cons

This laser would not be used against hypersonic missiles, they must be defeated by jamming and destroying their sensors, and with the upcoming Block 1B SM-6 defensive missile. Large supersonic and hypersonic missiles are too tough and would not be destroyed in time by the laser.

@@ultraman5168 to fire a missile into a moving target it needs continous radar tracking to obtain a radar locked right? Why not develop a very huge electronic microwaive. Science noted that microwaives disrupts radar waives. So if you direct the giant microwaive to an incoming missile it will lose its radar lock. Is that realistic?

@@deltadaggertm4011 you have essentially just described the process of radar jamming, this is precisely what radars do. They aim powerful signals at the enemy radar receiver to prevent it from detecting the signals it needs to detect aircraft. There is a funny story, they say that the microwave oven was invented by a US Navy radar technician, who had the idea when he accidentally ruined his shirt because he left a chocolate bar in his pocket, and the ship's radar melted it. I don't know if this is true but it demonstrates how high energy radars are very similar to microwaves.

@@deltadaggertm4011 look into weapons like CHAMP warhead and Bofors HMP Blackout. These are examples of advanced microwave systems.

@@ultraman5168 thats funny haha.. And another thought of mine by the way, this might be fictional but i dont know if this.can be realistic. The EMP. So when it is activated/detonated, it automatically kills any electronic life from an object right? So what if...they will make a countermissile with a warhead that has EMP, and when fired to counter an incoming missile, upon detonation or something even from a far, it will electronically kill the missile rendering it useless. Do you think its possible?

YAL-1. Look it up

US is likely near end phases on Gen 6 stealth fighter, wouldn't be surprised if they started fielding phase procurement. Most likely weapon systems like GAU-7/8A and similar have been replaced by energy based systems of mid to mature level as standard non-missile or gravity bomb compliment. The concept teams are already being or have been put together for Gen 7 aerial dominance jet fighters.

@@AM-dc7pv do you wait for my comment on new videos in this channel everyday?

I heard Stockdale which is weird because I don't hear well and usually get things wrong.

@@briancolbert5996 After the first two statements of "Stockade", the narrator then said "Stockdale". Having gotten the name correct on the third try, the narrator should have gone back and corrected his earlier mistakes, because he then knew the correct name.

Remember the Walker family.

@@gregorybooker5469 The who now?

I'm sure the navy has that tech under close guard. But yes the U.S. has been working on lasers since the early 60's and has a lead throughout the world on this technology. Russia especially China would love to have this.

@@jaysartori9032 The Walker family, John Walker and son were both navy and convicted for selling SOSUS and other classified information on undersea communications and code data.

@@gregorybooker5469 Oh yeah I remember now "TREADER"!

All this required is to dazzle the sensors of incoming missiles.

There are black budget projects, relax....

Those torpedoes wouldn't be able to be used bc of the harm to inocent people

😂😂😂

That particular ew has a limited range.

Hi i am from India. Does The US have any answer to Russia's S-500 Missile system ? Soon Russia will take over Ukraine.

@@jitukumar-wx3hc yes the Raptor and what Terry Bryant said 👆

@@jitukumar-wx3hc For now, the US doesn't need to beat the Prometheus, as numbers will be extremely low until production ramps up. It took Russia 10 years just to make 100 s-400 complexes. By 2017 numbers= Russia had its first 100 systems.

Why?

Oh, shut up.

Not really , nd this is just 1st step the (very) high powered systems are still coming

@@jrtaylor1275 He's a Chicom troll don't listen to him.