Re: The End of the Carrier Age?
That said, I enjoy your skepticism, it is entertaining in a Tokyo Rose kind of way. I do hope you consider a career in the photonics industry, as the pay and career opportunities are extraordinarily rewarding at this time. With that knowledge you will learn what role capacitors play in megawatt solid state electro-optic systems. And rest assured, last year's public demonstration of the navalized laser system was not the most powerful system that has been built by the US for that purpose.
I am actually well aware that this is by no means the most powerful laser that the US has built.
However, as the 2nd video you posted indicated, the current laser system requires the CIWS to designate a target to it. Which means it is not a stand-alone system that the CIWS is. There is also no mention of how much power it needs and what that translates to in terms ship space onboard a warship (for extra power generation capacity).
Not much use if the laser can't be powered by the power generators on smaller ships (such as frigates) that make up the bulk of any navy is there?
Lasers are not the be all and end all of all of weapon systems and tactics, as no single weapon platform is. Lasers are here to stay and laser weapon systems will continue to be developed until its full potential is realized. The new Ford Class carriers that the US is building is anticipating tactical laser systems to be integrated throughout the ship. Poo-poo tactical lasers at your own risk.
As I stated in a separate thread, I have no doubt that lasers are the future. Just not on the surface of the earth. They are ideal weapons for use in space where there is no weather. But there are serious limitations when used within the troposphere.
As for the new Ford class CVNs, how many will be built? These are nuclear powered warships which don't have much of a power generation limitation. Unfortunately, the reality is that all other warships have serious limits on how much power they can generate for their weapons on sensors. This is why up to now, Aegis systems can only be fielded on destroyers and not frigates. They use up too much power (although the Europeans have what they claim to be a "mini-Aegis" in a frigate with a Phased Array Radar that operates in the I-band).
Now, back to lasers itself in the maritime environment. As mentioned earlier, smoke has a detrimental effect on lasers. And a warship generates a heck of a lot of smoke when it is in action. Missile firings generate smoke. Gun firings generate smoke (including CIWS). Sudden acceleration of the ship generates smoke. How effective do you honestly think a laser will be in that kind of environment? Or perhaps all military munitions should be designed to be smokeless to facilitate laser weapons?
Than, there is the issue of rain and fog, which will adversely affect the performance of lasers. And since you have so much experience in lasers, why don't you elaborate on the effects that these have on lasers? Or is there such a thing as a laser that can penetrate fog/rain/smoke and still be effective at destroying a target several miles out?
Also, in the maritime environment, there is such a thing as salt desposits when a ship has been out at sea for some time. Salt deposits are very bad for optics. Sure, the laser lenses can be cleaned prior to firing. However, any residual desposits will affect the performance of the laser itself, unless the cleaning process is 100% thorough. Not an easy assurance for a maritime environment, particularly during typhoon season.
That video clip about lasers shooting down that drone is typical of the kind of positive spin put onto a developing capability. I recall vividly the positive spin of the Crusader liquid propellant artillery system that cost US$12 billion that was eventually abandoned with not a single operational system deployed.
Since the laser weapon is a next gen weapon, let's look at what a next gen threat looks like and whether it will be able to handle the threat. BrahMos is
indicative of what next gen anti-ship threats will look like.
[video=youtube;IWEqg1xTjhw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWEqg1xTjhw&feature=related[/video]
This thing weighs 3 tons, travels at up to Mach 3 and have a range of ~290km. It also has vernier thrusters, as shown in that clip, which makes it very manoeuvrable. It is currently operational.
A hypersonic variant with Mach 5+ is allegedly under development.
A 3 ton mass flying at Mach 3 towards its target is not going to be stopped by a laser in the fashion shown in the shooting down of the drone simply because the Brahmos' engine is not going to be visible to the laser. Even if the laser has enough time to destroy the seeker head, the missile will still have enough kinetic energy to carry it to its target. And cause serious damage even if the warhead doesn't blow because the rocket engine will still be burning.
Oh, and the older supersonic Yakhont (3-ton, Mach 2.5) is still in service. Heck, Vietnam and Indonesia actually have these missiles.
How good are lasers going to be against such massive, supersonic anti-ship threats?
Another clip showing the Brahmos:
[video=youtube;x5XsQMFfn90]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5XsQMFfn90&feature=related[/video]