3 ms·

In the future all these things will be countered by portable LASER systems.

coredog64 4y ago
Israel has explicitly identified drones as a target for Iron Beam. Once that’s operational I think you’ll see attitudes shift on drone value.
- qqqwerty 4y ago
  Drones aren't going anywhere. They are so cheap, plentiful, and useful that it doesn't really matter how good the counter measures get. And if the counter measures get too good, then those systems will become primary targets themselves. EDIT: Looking at the wikipedia for Iron Beam. The range is only 7km. A quick google search indicates drones can fly at elevations of 10km, safely out of range. Also, it sounds like Iron Beam was designed to handle the occasional rocket launch from Hamas, and not a full scale barrage of artillery. So a possible way to defeat this system would be to send a drone up to 10km, locate the Iron Beam system, and send a barrage of artillery shells in its direction and maybe sneak in a high precision shell or two in the volley to increase your odds of a hit. That seems like it would be sufficient to take it out.
  - ElectricalUnion 4y ago
    > Also looking at the wikipedia for Iron Beam. The range is only 7km It's limited by physics - as of now, if Israel needs long-range interdiction they use the missile-based Iron Dome instead. There's reports of drones armed with bombs shot down by the Iron Dome system. > a full scale barrage of artillery I don't think any system currently deployed has the capability of disrupting artillery/rocket barrages, mostly one-of events. Even the SDI initiative "Excalibur" project would only really worked in space (you don't want to detonate nuclear weapons very close to you, or scatter X-rays in the atmosphere instead of the target)
nine_k 4y ago
What about beam energy and weight of a laser system? Current laser-armed aircraft are huge cargo planes mostly. I suspect that non-coherent RF pulse weapons with phased-array focusing (along with detection and ranging) could be more realistically portable.
dredmorbius 4y ago
Laser defences require large energy supplies. They're an option against fixed positions, far less viable for individuals or mobile units, armoured or otherwise.

Israel has explicitly identified drones as a target for Iron Beam. Once that’s operational I think you’ll see attitudes shift on drone value.

qqqwerty 4y ago
Drones aren't going anywhere. They are so cheap, plentiful, and useful that it doesn't really matter how good the counter measures get. And if the counter measures get too good, then those systems will become primary targets themselves. EDIT: Looking at the wikipedia for Iron Beam. The range is only 7km. A quick google search indicates drones can fly at elevations of 10km, safely out of range. Also, it sounds like Iron Beam was designed to handle the occasional rocket launch from Hamas, and not a full scale barrage of artillery. So a possible way to defeat this system would be to send a drone up to 10km, locate the Iron Beam system, and send a barrage of artillery shells in its direction and maybe sneak in a high precision shell or two in the volley to increase your odds of a hit. That seems like it would be sufficient to take it out.
- ElectricalUnion 4y ago
  > Also looking at the wikipedia for Iron Beam. The range is only 7km It's limited by physics - as of now, if Israel needs long-range interdiction they use the missile-based Iron Dome instead. There's reports of drones armed with bombs shot down by the Iron Dome system. > a full scale barrage of artillery I don't think any system currently deployed has the capability of disrupting artillery/rocket barrages, mostly one-of events. Even the SDI initiative "Excalibur" project would only really worked in space (you don't want to detonate nuclear weapons very close to you, or scatter X-rays in the atmosphere instead of the target)

nine_k 4y ago

What about beam energy and weight of a laser system? Current laser-armed aircraft are huge cargo planes mostly. I suspect that non-coherent RF pulse weapons with phased-array focusing (along with detection and ranging) could be more realistically portable.

dredmorbius 4y ago

Laser defences require large energy supplies. They're an option against fixed positions, far less viable for individuals or mobile units, armoured or otherwise.