4 ms·

> The real problem imho is the size of the emitting aperture. Focusing a laser tightly at any distance requires a device probably too large for a fighter aircra

> The real problem imho is the size of the emitting aperture. Focusing a laser tightly at any distance requires a device probably too large for a fighter aircraft. Focusing a laser onto a 100mm point at 5km does not seem like it would take that large of an aperture, and that should be all you need to kill the seeker. > Get it during the boost phase (the first few seconds after launch) and even a pinprick through the side of the rocket motor will cause it to explode in a true "shoot down". IIRC most air to air missiles have a boost phase far longer than that - I think most will still be burning at intercept for shots inside the killbox. That's part of the selling point of the Meteor [0] - it can throttle, so it'll almost always be burning at intercept. > But in that scenario why wait for the missile to be launched? If you can burn through the rocket motor after launch, you can do so before launch. It's a lot easier to argue that the other side shot first when you blow up the missile AFTER it leaves their plane. Not to mention the case where the responsible aircraft wasn't detected until after launch... 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_(missile) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_(missile)

sandworm101 8y ago
>> 100mm point at 5km does not seem like it would take that large of an aperture. It gets trickier than that. From the perspective of the target missile the laser is a pinpoint source, easily ignored/blocked. You have to hit is with enough power to actually do damage. 50KW over a 10cm seeker head won't be enough. A missile is supersonic. That seeker head is already being bombarded by plenty of IR/heat and is actively cooled. You need to focus down to far less than a centimeter to start burning things.
- DuskStar 8y ago
  If it's an IR seeker, the cooling might be able to prevent damage, but is it enough to prevent heating the seeker sufficiently to cause the missile to lose lock? What happens if the laser turns off/loses track at 2 km while dropping flares - can your missile differentiate between flares and the skin of a plane in that scenario? And I can't help but think that a pinpoint source coming from your target is harder to ignore than one coming from anywhere else. Either way, at mach 4 it takes ~3.5 seconds to cover 5km. 50kw * 3.5s = 175kj, 42 grams of TNT equivalent. That's still a fair bit to mitigate. (but also not nearly as much as I was thinking)

sandworm101 8y ago

>> 100mm point at 5km does not seem like it would take that large of an aperture. It gets trickier than that. From the perspective of the target missile the laser is a pinpoint source, easily ignored/blocked. You have to hit is with enough power to actually do damage. 50KW over a 10cm seeker head won't be enough. A missile is supersonic. That seeker head is already being bombarded by plenty of IR/heat and is actively cooled. You need to focus down to far less than a centimeter to start burning things.

DuskStar 8y ago
If it's an IR seeker, the cooling might be able to prevent damage, but is it enough to prevent heating the seeker sufficiently to cause the missile to lose lock? What happens if the laser turns off/loses track at 2 km while dropping flares - can your missile differentiate between flares and the skin of a plane in that scenario? And I can't help but think that a pinpoint source coming from your target is harder to ignore than one coming from anywhere else. Either way, at mach 4 it takes ~3.5 seconds to cover 5km. 50kw * 3.5s = 175kj, 42 grams of TNT equivalent. That's still a fair bit to mitigate. (but also not nearly as much as I was thinking)