South Korea orders 'Star Wars' lasers to blast Northern drones out of the sky South Korea has commenced an effort to shoot drones out of the sky using lasers – and has named it the “Star Wars project". The project was announced on Thursday by the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), and apparently represents the first time a nation's military will deploy such laser-powered anti-aircraft …
I'd take DAPA's claims/plans for the future of this device with a crane-delivered, house-sized salt lick.
Jets and missiles take Oodles™-more power to disable/destroy than do drones, because they have so much more mass, which acts as a protective heat-sink.
Increased distance-to-target-from-laser reduces the beam's effectiveness, because particles in the atmosphere scatter the beam.
Further, jets and missiles travel hella faster than propeller-driven drones, so laser-based defence systems require Oodles™-better detection and tracking systems, vs what's needed for drones, for said laser-based defence systems systems to successfully defeat those jets and missiles.
>jets and missiles travel hella faster than propeller-driven drones
And another consequence of that is that the laser is unlikely to have 10 to 20 seconds, as described in the article, to irradiate the target. Which means the laser has to be a whole lot more powerful. Which makes it a lot more difficult and bulky and expensive.
All of that said, however, there is merit in a weapon that can take out drones cheaply. The main strength of drones is that it's difficult to kill them for less money than they cost the enemy.
Personally, I'd like a weapon to take out the menace of drones in UK beauty spots. Was trying to mind my own business having a swim in a picturesque river valley in the Peaks a few weeks ago, when a drone appeared and started pointing at me (+partner, who was actually trying to to the "getting changed under a towel" thing at the time). I resorted to throwing sticks at it, like some uncontacted Amazonian tribe chucking spears at a helicopter. Didn't manage to hit it, sadly. It's just rude. (And possibly illegal – I'm still not 100% clear on that point, having read the slightly confusing regulations. If the drone is under 250g, all rules seem to go out of the window or something. Not sure how I'm supposed to weigh a drone that's hovering 20m above and pointing at me.)
It's illegal to fly them Beyond Visual Line of Sight - so you should have been able to see the operator (or they should have been lurking behind a hill, where they can see their drone, but IIRC they should also be able to see what is beneath their drone)
But I agree - definitely need some kind of portable magnetron to zap drones, boomboxes, e-scooters, etc. Apparently the police are getting them, but they are quite bulky.
So version 1.0 works against drones, version 2.0 works against really fast drones, version 3.0 works against subsonic aircraft, and so forth. You don't have to wait until you can solve every problem to deploy a solution. Technology improves over time, as they develop lasers with more power, better tracking systems and so forth.
Importantly, this version 1.0 works against the least expensive and most numerous possible attack, drones and balloons. That's pretty key when your opponent does not have a lot of money to spend. But even against a better resourced opponent being able to shoot down all drones would be worthwhile - I imagine Ukraine would be very interested in a system like this! $1.45 per shot is a lot less than however many thousands of dollars per Patriot missile.
"I imagine Ukraine would be very interested in a system like this! $1.45 per shot is a lot less than however many thousands of dollars per Patriot missile."
Agreed, but I think this system as it stands right now and for the foreseeable near future, is only effective against the equivalent of small, maybe medium sized DJI-like drones. The sort causing real damage in Ukraine are the "small aircraft" sized ones loaded with explosives.
Russian drones have to travel fairly long distances to reach the civilian areas in Ukraine they're trying to terrorize. Maybe it takes 10 seconds to shoot down a small drone and 60 seconds to shoot down one of those larger drones. Keeping trained on the target for that length of time shouldn't be too difficult since drones are not exactly as evasive as a fighter jet. Even if the laser can't shoot for that long so long as it has a short, ahem, refractory period, it could use multiple shots to destroy it.
It also doesn't have to be 100% effective to be effective. If it is 50% or even 25% effective that leaves fewer drones left to take care of via other methods. Even reducing by 5% the overall number that get through and kill children and elderly is worth it.
Operating in the real world is also great for R&D, so it would benefit South Korea. That's a much faster way of determining the bugs with your system so you can rectify them than doing controlled testing in a firing range. This is operating in real world battle conditions and with an enemy that's far more motivated to find ways to evade or attack the system than any red team would ever be.
Burning through a copper wire ? Copper, that is one of the best heat conducting materials, that is difficult to solder even when static on a bench because it conducts said heat over the entire mass of the wire ? Good luck with that. Especially on a fast moving object in 3D : you'd need not only to follow it precisely – what's the size of the spot ? 1mm ? – but also follow it in focus, have adaptive optics to focus it through atmospheric turbulence, and prevent it from having any sort of dissipative painting or fairing. Well, it's not even luck that they will need.
Basically, this laser is only some excuse for government spending and industrial subvention. Might still be a good idea but it will never take out any aggressive flying object.
I imagine putting a hole in a balloon wouldn't require such high powered lasers. Something industrial might be adequate to drop NK's crap on their side of the DMZ.
The drone threat is now a clear and present danger which these laser systems are one of the more cost effective countermeasures.
There must be a few (older) americans that are thinking that Dugout Doug had the right ideas with respect to NK and the PRC. ;)
"I imagine putting a hole in a balloon wouldn't require such high powered lasers. Something industrial might be adequate to drop NK's crap on their side of the DMZ."
That could trigger the Norks though. Shooting them down just after they've crossed the border would be safer option. A smelly border might be the better option than having the shit land all over the place and/or kicking off a hot war by shooting down NK "property" over NK airspace.
If they have a pin point enough laser they could effectively "poke" a small hole in it, causing it to blow itself back across the border. That's the best of both worlds, they don't hit it when it over NK airspace, but they cause it to dump the garbage all over the Nork border guards.
Alternatively depending on the winds maybe they can use a wide beam to just heat up the balloon and cause it to gain altitude to where the wind is blowing in a different direction.
Back when laser weapons were a very new thing, I remember several people raising the objection that they could be easily defeated by wrapping the target in mirror foil.
After a while, someone good at physics came up with the actual math, and it turned out that the mirror wouldn't help much, if at all. IIRC, it turned out that, at the energy levels involved, the 0.1% of light that the mirror would absorb would be enough to cause it to heat up and deform slightly in such a way that would make it absorb more energy, which would deform it further, which would make it absorb more energy, in a loop that would result in the mirror ablating. This would all happen in the order of milliseconds, so it would be a poor defense.
Take with a grain of salt, this is just me recalling someone on a message board years and years ago.
Vey successfully, it seems.
Completed testing in Scotland in January this year:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/advanced-future-military-laser-achieves-uk-first
And planned to be deployed by 2027:
https://www.naval-technology.com/news/dragonfire-uk-royal-navy-to-get-ships-with-laser-beams-by-2027/#:~:text=The%20UK%20Government%20has%20confirmed%20the%20Royal%20Navy,what%20was%20understood%20during%20briefings%20earlier%20this%20year.
The Navy plan to have all their ships fitted with lasers by 2027. I think the frirst one is supposed to happen next year.
As the ships have already got Phalanx and most have either 30mm or 40mm cannon fitted as well - it seems that the Army would be the better place to get them. In my opinion the army should also get themselves some sort of gatling gun / cannon air defence system as quickly as possible. We do have Stormer, which can knock drones down with £20k Martlet missiles - so it's not as cost-inefficient as using expensive SAMs - but guns is cheaper.
Rapier's already gone.
The British Army have Sky Sabre, as of about 3 years ago.
It was almost immediately deployed to Poland, following The Russian Aggressor State's invasion of Ukraine:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk-deploy-sky-sabre-missile-defence-system-poland-says-minister-2022-03-17/
Yup. We have Sky Sabre. And we've got a Giraffe! link to Wiki of Giraffe radar
It was a bit slow for early deliveries, so I don't know how many sets we now have operational. A quick Google says we've got about 6 batteries (command vehicle, radar and 4-6 launch vehicles) but info doesn't seem to be that reliable or well sourced. MoD secrecy again.
But Poland are buying it, along with more Patriots from the US.
Sky Sabre is the land version of SeaCeptor (the RN's shorter range SAM - Aster / Sea Viper being the long range one). This uses the CAMM missile, which is heavily based on the ASRAM to save costs - but is radar guided (active seeker - so its own radar built in).
Most of NATO have worked under the assumption that we could easily achieve air superiority. So not built up our air defences. And while prep has been done for drone warfare, and militaries have been talking about it for a decade or two - there's a difference between the relatively small number of drones our forces have and the vast numbers of quadcopters with 3d-printed grenade launchers stuck to them that are flying round the front lines of Ukraine. Plus ballistic and cruise missiles are getting cheaper - and Iran are willing to hand them out like sweeties nowadays.
So I think a big investment is needed. SPAAGs (self-propelled anti-aircraft guns) need to make a comeback (like Germany's old Gepards that are doing sterling service in Ukraine. They're cheap and cheerful. But only being short range means you need an awful lot of them. Starstreak and Martlet are also pretty good for short range air defence. Stormer is decent but doesn't have radar - but can be networked to SkySabre - to give layered defence.
We should also have bought SAMP/T - which is the land based version of Aster (Sea Viper) - which France and Italy came up with. France gave a set to Ukraine. We're retro-fitting some of the anti-ballistic missile tech from that into the Type 45 destroyers' missiles - as well as buffing them by giving them an additional 24-36 Sea Ceptor. The Navy have also got all the SPAAGs they need - so it's time we got the army some of this stuff.
There's also anti-drone electronic warfare. And I think we're going to have to get in on one of the anti-missile satellite networks. Tracking cruise missiles is hard - they're only 20 miles from the radar horizon if they fly low enough. So you'd need a radar every 40 miles to track one - and then you'd often get minimal warning. Tracking them from above would be better.
Apart from that bit - and drone-hunting drones - all the tech exists. We had Navy Phalanx systems mounted on trailers, with a generator, to defend the bases in Afghanistan, so all this can be done with the will. And the budget.
Kim has clearly got some top advisers feeding him ideas to force the South to the negotiating table. Throwing old fish heads into your neighbour's garden is such a power play. I think Sun Tzu mentions that in the first chapter of The Art of War. All that remains is for Kim to inform the South that his dad could beat up their president's dad and Korea will be united under communism.
I'm not sure about his Dad - but Kim Jong Un's Grandad still holds the title of Eternal President of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. He died 30 years ago - but even that doesn't stop him still being in charge. Surely that's got to be worth something in a fight?
North Korea's garbage ballons are a response -or so I understand- to South Korea sending ballons with panphlets and USB sticks filled with K-dramas and K-pop up north.
Personally I find that a bag of used hygienic paper is a perfectly adequate payback for a Korean soap opera.
SK is sending balloons north, you say. NK is sending balloons south, SK says. I guess this only works when the wind is blowing in the right direction, eh? How often does that happen?
(Ninja'd by ChrisElvridge, or some spelling like that...)
Winds can be different at different heights. This is how you can steer, sort of, hot air balloons. Or you just wait for it to be blowing the right way.
One of the initial gas attacks in WWI in 1915 went horribly wrong, because the wind changed. At the time they weren't using shells - but gas projectors. Basically a fancy name for a tank with a tap on it. The german idea of PPE was a piece of cloth soaked in chemicals that you strapped over your mouth. It only worked for a short period of time and didn't protect your skin or eyes. But could be re-charged by pissing on it. German troops were often reluctant to advance into allied positions, even when everyone was incapacitated - until they were issued better gas protection.
The wind where I live blows from the south, from the north, from the west and from the east. Just depends on when. It is pretty much the same everywhere outside of the tropics. So if you're in the north and want to send a balloon south, you check your forecast and release it at the appropriate time. Ditto if you're in the south and want to send a balloon north.
There are often prevailing winds in different locations. The border, or more accurately a sort-of mutually agreed demilitarised zone, between North and South Korea is 250km long with different bodies of water either side of it. There are very likely to be patches of this border with winds that tend to blow one way or the other, even if this depends on the time of day or weather conditions.
Unfortunately for the South Koreans, Seoul and ma y other areas of built up land, are quite close to the border which makes the tactic of balloons or rubbish quite easy. In reverse there is very little on the North Korean side, even compared to the rest of the nation, for the South Koreans to send leaflets or USB sticks into.
I came up with a variant that uses a particle generator.
Essentially a miniature cyclotron that fits into a backpack, powered by a radioactive isotope source and superconducting bending magnets.
Slight problem: it also only has a range of maybe 300 feet at best but could be aircraft mounted.
Slight problem *2, the isotope is incredibly rare on Earth.
Israel desperate needs this system asap to counter Hezballah's seemingly free reign to attack norther Israel. The USA simply does not seem to care enough about defending its outposts in Syria and Iraq to have something already operational.
“That’s not a laser [bzzzzt], now that’s a laser!
C. Dundee, Gunner, Raytheon
“Add a galliforme radar tracker and I’ll take it.”
Wyle E Coyote, Fellow at the Canis latrans Anti-hunger Society
“Dammit use the force like I taught you, won’t cost you $1.45 and you can use it to buy me a slurpee”
Ben Kenobi, Spiritual Consultant and Force Evangelist
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
