Are Laser & Kinetic Weapons Closer Than We Think?, page 3

Originally posted by Just1Man
How about ceramics, or some kind of heat sink device? Could something like that negate enough of the energy to have an effect? How about Tungsten (ala Bunker Buster)? How about a combination of the above?

Heat sink elements could not dissipate the intensity of a weapons class megawatt laser quickly enough to keep the laser energy from having it's desired effect.
There is also the consideration that the energy used by a weapons class laser is emitted in a bandwidth that changes the parameters of what elements would best impede a heat source weapon.

There are certainly a lot of "what if" scenarios one could dream up trying to defeat such a weapon, but you need to consider what enemy assets the laser is designed to target - then consider how countermeasures would impact the useablity of those assets.
For instance laser countermeasures on an artillery missile would either make the missile too heavy, negatively affect its flight characteristics or impact it's very usuability as a weapon - the best case scenario for such countermeasures would be to have no explosive in the warhead and no combustable material for fuel... but this of course would severely impede the ability of the missile to perform it's appointed task.

Also, how effective would this weapon be in the desert? Smoke bombs are bad, sandstorms are crippling. Unreliable operation in a desert environment (diffraction) would make it's use sketch, at best. Especially in Southwest Asia.

Consider any inclimate weather. Fog, precipitation, or heavy smog/pollution could render it weakened to the point of useless.

Interestingly enough such obscurants are having less and less impact on laser weapon development.
Short pulse lasers are managing to drill "ballistic photons" through the thickest obscurants and still produce results on the target.

The chemical lasers currently being developed by Northrop-Grumman and Raytheon for battlefield use are COIL & CO2 infrared short-pulse lasers that emit an amplified energy on the far-infrared spectrum, in the 8-14 micron range. Because of this wavelength the energy of these lasers is only minimally diminished in certain vapors (fogs) and smoke generated by hydrocarbon fuel.

Obscurants that are most effective in blocking battlefield lasers are dust (thick clouds of dust) and smoke produced by white and red phosphorous.

Obscurants that are mildly effective at thwarting the energy of a high power laser are water vapor clouds and fog.

Increasing the wattage, of course, should make it less susceptible to environmental interference.

Once the wattage is high enough in a small enough package it will make a great weapon, but right now it seems kinda like there's a lot left to be done.

The chemical lasers that are being developed as weapons are heavy and operate in the megawatt range - these are not personal weapons like a rifle or pistol nor is there any plan underway to make them such.
Solid state lasers on the other hand have the potential to be a squad sized weapon or a small mechanized infantry weapon. They would be operating in the 100+ kw range, still more than adequate to quickly defeat weak areas of armor although not with instantaneous results as with a megawatt laser.

No one is touting the laser as the latest and greatest weapon...
Lasers have their weaknesses and they have their strengths - What these weapons do strategically is increase the available options for a military that knows which tools achieve the best results in a specific situation.
If a laser is not the best weapon for a specific task then simply go with a better option - the DoD is not replacing anything, only enhancing their toolkit.