Army laser weapon passes big test, cuts through fog to take down drones!

a reply to: SLAYER69
That "rifle" or what they call a rifle isn't what I'd call a rifle; they say it needs three men to carry it, so that alone says calling it a "rifle" is a stretch to me. Moreover the chemical reaction power source sounds quite limited in capability.

The other sources make much more sense like a jet engine or better yet an aircraft carrier.

Even with a jet engine as a power source, it will probably have a considerable effect on "fuel efficiency", limiting the range of the jet if they use the weapon much.

originally posted by: BettyHill400

originally posted by: MrSpad
Ad this to the US's other air defenses and sending anything in the air near US forces will no longer be an option.

except you take mirrors or polish you missiles

or find out laser wavelength and paint with material that reflects that specific range of wavelengths

Missile Shield ?

Shield penetration with better bullets.

it is called arms race

As OccamsRazor04 pointed out above mirrors will not work. Nothing will at this point that would be practicle. Smoke and fog (weather) were considered to be the best defense but, this no longer appears to be effective either.

Mr checkov....FIre phasers on my mark!

Lol. Hey i wonder if they can cut designs in the fog as well. Imagine them carving a message in the smoke/or fog for the other ship to read. Turn back or get slagged.

And funny enough, they're using an Xbox One controller to control the new laser weapon! War Games, anyone?

I have a feeling that the "secret sauce" for these new weapons isn't particularly the laser design, but rather a new power source being developed. Not sure about man-portable, but something small enough to work from a Humvee or any aircraft they have. DARPA is probably sitting on fusion tech that would mean cheap power for the rest of us. Thing is, they want this ace up their sleeve where the Russians and Chinese can't have it, so the rest of us (outside the military) aren't going to see it anytime soon either. Basically the thinking behind keeping it secret goes back to what happened in the early 1950's when the U.S. was no longer the only one with fission based weapons.

originally posted by: pauljs75
I have a feeling that the "secret sauce" for these new weapons isn't particularly the laser design, but rather a new power source being developed. Not sure about man-portable, but something small enough to work from a Humvee or any aircraft they have. DARPA is probably sitting on fusion tech that would mean cheap power for the rest of us. Thing is, they want this ace up their sleeve where the Russians and Chinese can't have it, so the rest of us (outside the military) aren't going to see it anytime soon either. Basically the thinking behind keeping it secret goes back to what happened in the early 1950's when the U.S. was no longer the only one with fission based weapons.

maybe they have something weird from the fringe like LENR or nucleonic batteries but if i understand it correctly fusion will not be viable in a small compact light weight design of the degree needed for a man portable weapon. fusion has a scaling factor that means that at least for now a reactor that can break even has a certain lower size limit. even the smallest oddball contenders for break even have lower scale limits and break even for these designs are actually extrapolated from the scaling factor math. some of these are about the size of a low boy truck bed or shipping container. but not backpack sized or deck of cards sized needed for a laser rifle or pistol.

you were looking at Boeing's website for the x-37B website epic flight, then saw this . But wow its right there for every one to see. I agree with you Pauljr. the 50's. You guys are going slightly deeper then Id like you to take it but you definitely have my attention.

I don't think this technology is classified anymore.
Kind of basic information you need to know about drones.
Didn't Honeywell build the originals, probably 1950's?
Try this link fro the other thread.
"anisotropy on the ray"