4 ms·

Youve got enough comments to reply to so Ill be concise. If this can be used against drone craft or reliably against missiles then I'm for it. If it's just a be

Youve got enough comments to reply to so Ill be concise. If this can be used against drone craft or reliably against missiles then I'm for it. If it's just a better gun Im against it.

tbihl 9y ago
In all likelihood it's a pretty poor substitute for a gun. Consider that this weapon is suspected to cost around one dollar per shot (not including capital costs, I'm sure.) Figure that the navy generates energy pretty expensively and assume that means ~3kW*hr. Wikipedia says somewhere in the range 15-50kW. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Weapon_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Weapon_System). I'm not up-to-date on the latest and greatest in batteries, but I think a person would have a hard time carrying the energy supply for a laser weapon that is comparable in effectiveness to the many forms of relatively compact guns in their many forms, whether we're discussing anti-air, anti-tank, or anti-personnel. This is the navy trying to be able to deal with the asymmetry of a battle field in which the most credible threats are swarms of cheap drones. Consider that there are navy ships where the cheapest weapon on-board costs $0.75 million per shot, and it's not surprising that this would be exciting for them.
- grogenaut 9y ago
  If you're on a ship with a reactor, it's more just about how you are using your energy than the cost of the energy. You're generating that power no matter what. However if you're on a conventional power then yes you would count it.
  - tbihl 9y ago
    I completely disagree. Refueling is incredibly expensive and time consuming, and the frequency of doing so directly results from how carefully fuel is conserved throughout core life.
    - grogenaut 9y ago
      source?
- moron4hire 9y ago
  Just to note: a dollar a shot is not very far off from the current retail price of rifle bullets.
  - killjoywashere 9y ago
    We don't actually point guns up very often though. In part, because the threats move too fast, and in part because bullets come down. What's the ballistic range of 20 mm depleted uranium round? If I shot drones in the Gulf of Aden and end up peppering a mall in Djibouti, we're all going to have a bad day.
    - MrLeap 9y ago
      The same physics that makes shotguns safe to clay shoot with seem like natural ballistic solutions to this.. But sure, lasers I guess.
      - killjoywashere 9y ago
        The range of a 12 gauge shotgun with a sabot round is claimed to be up to 200 yards. The maximum firing range of a 20 mm cannon is 4 miles. That's without using depleted uranium (which both harder and denser).
      - megaman22 9y ago
        Sure, if you can get inside of 40 yards, a shotgun is a great point-defense weapon. You put more muzzle velocity and bigger pellets coming out of it, so you can reach further, well, that gets back to square one. It's not all that much fun being downrange from somebody shooting at airborne geese from a blind a couple hundred yards off, I can tell you...
        MrLeap 9y ago
        Being downrange of a giant laser is probably not fun either. Seems like a good way to blind people by glancing a metal hand rail. I'm also suspicious of the range of any laser based technology. Atmosphere seems to attenuate it pretty quick. I remember reading in 2007 on slashdot theoretical solutions that shoot some kind of hollow cylinder shaped beam that ionizes the air in the hollow center, allowing a laser to go further before being attenuated. They must have made some physical advancements far beyond my reading, since birdshot just seems easier.

Youve got enough comments to reply to so Ill be concise. If this can be used against drone craft or reliably against missiles then I'm for it. If it's just a better gun Im against it.

tbihl 9y ago

In all likelihood it's a pretty poor substitute for a gun. Consider that this weapon is suspected to cost around one dollar per shot (not including capital costs, I'm sure.) Figure that the navy generates energy pretty expensively and assume that means ~3kW*hr. Wikipedia says somewhere in the range 15-50kW. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Weapon_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Weapon_System). I'm not up-to-date on the latest and greatest in batteries, but I think a person would have a hard time carrying the energy supply for a laser weapon that is comparable in effectiveness to the many forms of relatively compact guns in their many forms, whether we're discussing anti-air, anti-tank, or anti-personnel. This is the navy trying to be able to deal with the asymmetry of a battle field in which the most credible threats are swarms of cheap drones. Consider that there are navy ships where the cheapest weapon on-board costs $0.75 million per shot, and it's not surprising that this would be exciting for them.

grogenaut 9y ago
If you're on a ship with a reactor, it's more just about how you are using your energy than the cost of the energy. You're generating that power no matter what. However if you're on a conventional power then yes you would count it.
- tbihl 9y ago
  I completely disagree. Refueling is incredibly expensive and time consuming, and the frequency of doing so directly results from how carefully fuel is conserved throughout core life.
  - grogenaut 9y ago
    source?
moron4hire 9y ago
Just to note: a dollar a shot is not very far off from the current retail price of rifle bullets.
- killjoywashere 9y ago
  We don't actually point guns up very often though. In part, because the threats move too fast, and in part because bullets come down. What's the ballistic range of 20 mm depleted uranium round? If I shot drones in the Gulf of Aden and end up peppering a mall in Djibouti, we're all going to have a bad day.
  - MrLeap 9y ago
    The same physics that makes shotguns safe to clay shoot with seem like natural ballistic solutions to this.. But sure, lasers I guess.
    - killjoywashere 9y ago
      The range of a 12 gauge shotgun with a sabot round is claimed to be up to 200 yards. The maximum firing range of a 20 mm cannon is 4 miles. That's without using depleted uranium (which both harder and denser).
    - megaman22 9y ago
      Sure, if you can get inside of 40 yards, a shotgun is a great point-defense weapon. You put more muzzle velocity and bigger pellets coming out of it, so you can reach further, well, that gets back to square one. It's not all that much fun being downrange from somebody shooting at airborne geese from a blind a couple hundred yards off, I can tell you...
      - MrLeap 9y ago
        Being downrange of a giant laser is probably not fun either. Seems like a good way to blind people by glancing a metal hand rail. I'm also suspicious of the range of any laser based technology. Atmosphere seems to attenuate it pretty quick. I remember reading in 2007 on slashdot theoretical solutions that shoot some kind of hollow cylinder shaped beam that ionizes the air in the hollow center, allowing a laser to go further before being attenuated. They must have made some physical advancements far beyond my reading, since birdshot just seems easier.