DECADES TO ‘ZAP’
Bulletin, in a comprehensive survey of Army technology, named directed-energy weapons as one of 13 key fields where the Army needed to invest in the technology base’s ability to do research. Tis list was prompted by real fears that the United States was close to permanently surren- dering the technological advantage to the Soviet Union.
Of course, during this time low-energy lasers became common across all kinds of weapon systems to mark targets and guide conventional ammunition. But high-energy lasers that don’t just guide another weapon but are the weapon themselves remained elusive.
Now, though, the Army has high-energy lasers zapping test targets from multiple platforms. (For reference, a 5-kilowatt laser
is equivalent to about 5 million
handheld laser pointers.) In Army tests, directed-energy weapons have been mounted on helicopters and cargo trucks and have melted truck engines from a mile away, as well as drones, laptops, small-caliber mortars and other projec- tiles. “Te technology is coming of age as
a realistic solution for ground platforms against small, close-in threats,” such as boats and drones, said Paul Shattuck, director of Lockheed Martin Space Sys- tems Co., in an interview with Defense Systems published in June 2016.
THE SCIENCE IS THERE It has been a long time coming. “We first determined we could use lasers in the early
’60s. It was not until the ’90s when we determined we could have the additional power needed to hit a target of substance. It took us that long to create a system and we have been working that kind of system ever
blind a camera on a drone, take out the camera or bring down the entire drone,” Shattuck noted.
since,” Mary Miller, then-
deputy assistant secretary of the Army for research and technology, told military- news website Scout Warrior in 2016.
Over those years, the focus shifted from chemical lasers, which are cumbersome— a Boeing 747 carried the military’s last chemical laser—and risk toxic spills, to the more stable solid-state fiber laser, gen- erated by fiber optics. “Tat’s one of the advantages of a fiber laser; you can dial the effect by applying more or less power. As an example, we can vary power to
Industry and DOD experts alike agree that the science is there to operational- ize directed-energy weapons. Te U.S. Navy’s amphibious transport dock USS Ponce has carried a 30-kilowatt laser weapon system known as LaWS since 2014 for testing. (Because a laser weapon draws a lot of power, larger platforms like ships and planes were a more obvious starting point than most Army vehicles.) It’s effective against drones and small ves- sels, but it would need more kilowatts to defend against anti-ship missiles; the Navy awarded Northrop Grumman Corp. a $91 million contract in 2015 to develop the next generation of the system, with a goal of demonstrating a 150- kilowatt sea- borne weapon in 2018.
Te more kilowatts a laser has, the faster it can burn through targets, the better it can pierce through obscurants such as dust, smoke and fog, and the better chance it has of burning through any reflective material (like a mirror) protecting a target.
TOASTED
Adam Aberle, High Energy Laser Mobile Test Truck program manager with the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/ Army Forces Strategic Command, displays an unmanned aerial vehicle hit by a compact laser weapon system during the Maneuver Fires Integrated Experiment at Fort
Sill, Oklahoma,
in April 2016. Participation in the exercise marked a significant milestone: the weapon system’s ability to integrate with other military equipment and perform effectively during a combat situation. (Photo by Monica K. Guthrie, Fort Sill Public Affairs)
150
Army AL&T Magazine
October-December 2017
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156
