US Laser and Rail Gun Development News

pardon me, DefenseNews: "He would not specify the rules of engagement for the laser, but indicated the Navy is ready to use the weapon to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles." ("He" is Vice Adm. Kevin "Kid" Donegan, commander of Naval Forces Central Command)
I've always thought LaWS is like CIWS, so I've been wrong all the time? could be LOL anyway, because of this I interrupted reading
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Commander: US Navy Won’t Back Down From Gulf
As geopolitical tensions reverberate across the Arabian Gulf, the US Navy has no plans to back down, a top naval official said Sunday.

As the tip of the spear, the Navy has its most advanced weapons technology ready for use in the Gulf.

The 5th Fleet is operating a powerful laser weapons system, capable of destroying or disabling targets with dazzling accuracy, just off the coast of Iran, according to Vice Adm. Kevin "Kid" Donegan, commander of Naval Forces Central Command. The new laser, deployed from the Afloat Forward Staging Base Ponce, is a pivotal asset to defend against ballistic missiles, small attack boats and UAVs.

Donegan told Defense News in a Nov. 8 interview at the Dubai Air Show that his commanders have permission to use the weapon if a critical situation arises. He would not specify the rules of engagement for the laser, but indicated the Navy is ready to use the weapon to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles.

In addition, the Navy is aggressively adding ships to the Gulf region in the next few years. By 2020, the 5th Fleet will grow from 30 ships to 40 ships, Donegan said.

“We are definitely not leaving the region,” he said. “You are not going to see the Navy leaving this region anytime soon.”

Donegan’s comments come at a critical point for US relations in the region, with critics openly accusing the Pentagon of pulling out of the fight against the Islamic State.

The number of reported airstrikes by the US in Syria dropped after Russia began flying in the region, going from an average of seven strikes a day in August to less than four strikes a day in October. The Pentagon has denied that Russia's presence has been the driver for that dip in strikes, instead blaming a series of factors including an increased focus of US airpower on Iraq and environmental factors.

Adding to the perception that the US is drawing down forces in the Gulf, the Navy currently has no carrier presence in the region. The USS Theodore Roosevelt left the Gulf in October, marking the first time since 2007 the Navy hasn’t had a carrier deployed to the 5th Fleet's area of operations. The Roosevelt’s relief, the USS Harry S. Truman, isn’t expected to arrive in the Gulf until this winter, leaving a carrier gap of at least two months.

Some see the Roosevelt’s departure as a blow to anti-ISIS operations. The Roosevelt carrier strike group carried out 1,812 combat sorties and expended 1,085 precision-guided munitions against ISIS, according to the Navy. Commanders can’t completely replace the capability the carrier and its airwing bring to the fight, Donegan said.

But the Navy is working hard to mitigate the impact of the temporary carrier gap on anti-ISIS operations, Donegan said. Between US and coalition ships, for instance the French Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier, the Navy has about 30 vessels to 40 vessels in the region, in the US Central Command area of responsibility, he said. This includes amphibious strike groups — which can deploy fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft — Aegis ballistic missile defense ships, mine-sweeping vessels and 10 coastal patrol ships.

“You can’t completely replace what that kind of ship and airwing bring, not just in firepower but in situational awareness, understanding the operational picture, but we’ve been able to do a pretty good job mitigating it,” Donegan said.

French leaders last week said it would deploy the Charles de Gaulle carrier and a carrier strike group to boost its operations against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Donegan said the US has strong cooperation with the French.

"Absolutely we are coordinating with the French. Each country that comes to the region, we work with them because we have some common interests and where we have common interests we work together," he said. "Their team is very experienced in this region and in fact this will be the second time in the same year they’ve been back."

On whether the de Gaulle's presence will fill the carrier gap, Donegan said the coalition nations are working to coordinate their schedules.

The two navies also have an agreement to operate their aircraft from each other’s carriers, Donegan said.

"We actually have a program where we they land on our ships and we land on theirs, so we've been doing that for a while,” Donegan said. “So we have really good interoperability with the French.”

The US Navy may also look to the UK in future to help protect the region. Speaking at the Dubai Airshow on Nov. 8, Phillip Dunne, UK defense procurement minister, told reporters that the Gulf will be a focus of the upcoming Strategic Defense and Security Review, and indicated it will likely contain an emphasis on increased presence in the region, which could eventually involve the UK’s two new aircraft carriers.

“I point you again to the [SDSR], to see what more will be done, not just in this region but elsewhere within areas of NATO operations, for the UK to play a leading role,” Dunne said. “As you know, we are in the process of building two aircraft carriers, which — when they are operational — will restore a very significant carrier strike capability to the armed forces, which will give us potentially a full spectrum response.”

Asked whether that means the UK could fill some of the “void” left by the United States' perceived withdrawal from the region, Dunne was flat in his opinion.

“We don’t see the US as having left a void in the region,” he said.

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubair also argued that the Pentagon’s presence in the region has increased, despite the Roosevelt’s departure.

"The strategic agreement with the United States has not changed. The American presence in the region has in fact increased whether an aircraft carrier has been withdrawn or not,” Al-Jubair said at the Institute of Strategic Studies' Manama Dialogue earlier this month, adding that the number of US troops in the region is almost at a record high. "I would say America’s commitment to Gulf security when we measure it by what the US is doing and providing and how the GCC states and the US are working, is at an all-time high. I would not measure it by one aircraft carrier leaving the Gulf.”

The US and Gulf nations are also now implementing agreements to intensify cooperation in cybersecurity, military cooperation, intelligence sharing, ballistic missile defense and maritime security, Al-Jubair said.

Aleksandar Jovovic, principal at Avascent, said the optics of the Roosevelt’s withdrawal from the Gulf are “less than optimal,” but the ship’s departure does not indicate the US is drawing down from the region.

“I don’t think the US government has any intention of disengaging from the region anytime soon,” he said. “All signs point to the US wanting to maintain that pressure on ISIL.”

In another sign of the US cooperation with Gulf nations, an intelligence unit working directly under Donegan is providing operational intelligence to the Saudi-led Arab coalition in Yemen, he said during the interview.

"As you know our country is supporting the GCC countries with intelligence information-sharing and logistics, so we have a coordination cell that works for me that’s called the JCPC, the Joint Coordination Planning Cell, and that cell is commanded by a two-star Marine who works for me," he said.

The cell, Donegan stated, is the main window of coordination between 5th Fleet intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets and the Arab coalition to facilitate information-sharing as well as operational assistance such as logistics, refueling of airplanes, among other things.

"That’s the cell that does the coordination back and forth with the intelligence sharing the information sharing and can coordinate logistics like refueling of airplanes and things like that, so the communications method is through that," he said.

Donegan was selected in June as the US 5th Fleet commander. He was formerly the acting deputy chief of naval operations for operations, plans and strategy. Donegan served as director of operations for U.S. Central Command before moving on in 2012. He served his first operational assignment with the "Wildcats" of Strike Fighter Squadron 131, the fleet's first F/A-18 squadron.

He was one of the first Hornet pilots to deploy from the East Coast, a cruise that culminated in successful airstrikes against Libya in 1986.He has clocked more than 3,800 hours in 30-plus types of aircraft, including 800 traps on 15 different carriers, according to his bio.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
pardon me, DefenseNews:

"He would not specify the rules of engagement for the laser, but indicated the Navy is ready to use the weapon to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles."

("He" is Vice Adm. Kevin "Kid" Donegan, commander of Naval Forces Central Command)
I've always thought LaWS is like CIWS, so I've been wrong all the time? could be LOL

Commander: US Navy Won’t Back Down From Gulf
The current system cannot shoot down incoming ballistic missile, or incoming ASMs.

They have demonstrated the ability to shoot down UAVs, destroy small fast boats, and to shoot down small incoming rockets.

The US Navy definitely intends to develop and produce more powerful lasers and hopes one day to use it as a anti-missile weapon.

I have come to find that Defense News often has some very inaccurate quotes and speculation.

Note, that the paragraph you use does not contain any quote from the admiral. There are no quotation marks, simply a statement,. And I believe that statement is absolutely wrong and not what the Admiral either said or intended.

The current LAWS on the single vessel there does not have that capability.
 
Last edited:
The current system cannot shot down incoming ballistic missile, or incoming ASMs.
...

thanks, I thought I missed a test :)

Note, that the paragraph you use does not contain any quote from the admiral. There are no quotation marks, simply a statement,. And I believe that statement is absolutely wrong and not what the Admiral either said or intended.

The current LAWS on the single vessel there does not have that capability.
the next paragraph is:
"Donegan told Defense News in a Nov. 8 interview at the Dubai Air Show that his commanders have permission to use the weapon if a critical situation arises. He would not specify the rules of engagement for the laser, but indicated the Navy is ready to use the weapon to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles."

OK maybe it's just a "feel good" article, and I'll leave at that
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
thanks, I thought I missed a test :)


the next paragraph is:

"Donegan told Defense News in a Nov. 8 interview at the Dubai Air Show that his commanders have permission to use the weapon if a critical situation arises. He would not specify the rules of engagement for the laser, but indicated the Navy is ready to use the weapon to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles."

OK maybe it's just a "feel good" article, and I'll leave at that

Uh...that's the paragraph I am talking about from the article you linked to.

They do not QUOTE the Admiral. There are no quotation marks around what they say he said. They just say that Admiral Donegan told Def. News something in an interview.

This is sloppy journalism, and I believe it is because the never said precisely what they are attributing
 

kwaigonegin

Colonel
The current system cannot shot down incoming ballistic missile, or incoming ASMs.

They have demonstrated the ability to shoot down UAVs, destroy small fast boats, and to shoot down small incoming rockets.

The US Navy definitely intends to develop and produce more powerful lasers and hopes one day to use it as a anti-missile weapon.

I have come to find that Defense News often has some very inaccurate quotes and speculation.

Note, that the paragraph you use does not contain any quote from the admiral. There are no quotation marks, simply a statement,. And I believe that statement is absolutely wrong and not what the Admiral either said or intended.

The current LAWS on the single vessel there does not have that capability.

The good general was probably referring to GBI which was sent to the Gulf aboard a navy asset and article probably thought it was some 22nd century weapon system. ;).

Anyway current laser and targeting technology is still at least a couple decades away from being practical enough in burning through a hypersonic RV. Even if you're able to have megawatt power, you still need to hold it long enough to burn through for the kill.

At best, in the near future if the targeting asset is extremely lucky and nearby, perhaps it can shoot at the missile during the boost phase and destroy or damage the missile but that is an extremely risky undertaking because you usually want to tanger the warheads not the entire rocket. The last thing you want is to damage it enough and it falls on your neighbors yard!

Past that point we're talking distant future tech. At Mach 20, you need to engage hundreds of miles away. RVs by it nature also has extremely robust and strong outer shell/heat shield for rentry and couple that with a naturally form plasma coating at that speed would be extremely difficult to destroy a ballistic missile on land or ship by lasers. Hard kill is still the only way at this point in time and the forseeable future.

Best bet at this point is still orbital laser if one truly insist on lasers.
 

strehl

Junior Member
Registered Member
Killing an RV is definitely not easy for a laser operating at visible or near IR wavelengths. X Ray band lasers on the other hand would be very effective but so far no practical X Ray gain mechanism has been lab proven (at the required flux levels). A ground based FEL might eventually achieve the necessary energy level and optimal wavelength. On the other hand, besides kinetic kill interceptors, there is also the option of placing a railgun in orbit (which was the original impetus for developing them). All of these would be surpassed if neutral particle beams could be propagated with control. Again, lab tests indicated the required level of homogeneity in particle energy and collimation (directionality) exceeded current technology. For the near term, boost phase/bus phase kills with lasers and RV kills with kinetic interception seem to be the most reasonable avenues for research.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
General question about the effectiveness of laser weapons, but wouldn't a reflective coating and/or spinning/rotating the missile/RV be an effective hard counter to laser weapon intercepts?

Seems like a very cheap and effective means to counter something very hard and expensive to develop and field.

Worse, such a countermeasure would be very easily, cheaply and quickly applied to existing missiles to counter laser weapons as soon as they are fielded.

How could lasers counter that?
 

strehl

Junior Member
Registered Member
RV are made to withstand heat and direct energy weapon's primary method of attack is to apply heat.
Do you see the problem?

"Heat" in terms of solid materials is simply the motion of atomic particles. Energy imparted too rapidly to be dissipated as heat (actually vibrations in the electron lattice) cause an ablative spallation. A pulsed laser where the energy is concentrated at the leading edge of the pulse induces a mechanical effect rather than heating. For example, a 100W pulsed laser can punch holes in a quartz plate while a 100W CW laser will have no effect. One of the SDI FEL proposals was from Livermore Labs packing enough Joules of energy in a single pulse to blast a hole through anything not built like a battleship. How energy density and temporal shaping interact with materials has been studied for decades and I have never seen published data (from the laser effects and vulnerability labs in the military) so I figure it must be classified.
 
Top