Help support TMP


"Navy Will Make 2013 Its Year of the Laser Gun" Topic


16 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Modern Naval Discussion (1946 to 2015) Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

20mm U.S. Army Specialists, Episode 4

Another episode of Identity That Figure!


Featured Workbench Article

Blind Old Hag's Do-It-Yourself Flight Stands

How Blind Old Hag Fezian makes flight stands for 1/300 scale aircraft.


Featured Profile Article

Report from Bayou Wars 2006

The Editor heads for Vicksburg...


Featured Movie Review


1,114 hits since 19 Mar 2013
©1994-2026 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP19 Mar 2013 11:51 a.m. PST

"During a year of budget cuts that has the U.S. military freaking out, the Navy is improbably signaling it'll take major steps forward on developing laser cannons.

Next month, the Navy plans to devote a big panel discussion on the "Breakthrough Technologies" behind energy weapons at its annual D.C.-area confab known as Sea Air Space. Heading it will be the officer charged with moving those lasers out of sci-fi and onto ships, Rear Adm. Matthew Klunder, the Navy's chief of research. It'll be a de facto prologue to a far more significant event the Navy plans in the coming months: the first-ever demonstration tour of a laser gun aboard a surface ship, the U.S.S. Ponce.

That's a major show of confidence in laser technology, for two reasons. First, testing a laser gun — most likely a solid-state laser — on a ship at sea puts enormous pressure on a much-hyped weapon to show-and-prove. Second, the laser isn't going on any old ship, it's going on the Ponce, recently retrofitted to become an "Afloat Forward Staging Base" — that is, a new launchpad for attack helicopters, drones and commandos for, among other missions, counterterrorism raids. In other words, the Navy is putting laser weaponry aboard one of the ships it's most eager to highlight.

All of this is still a demonstration — one with the added and perhaps unintended consequence of adding more hype to a form of weapon that's been nothing but hype for literally decades. But it comes at a time when congressionally mandated budget shortfalls have the Navy scaling back nearly everything it plans on doing this year. Research cash is especially scarce. Yet one of the naval community's biggest laser advocates argues that the unique features of so-called "directed energy" weaponry are particularly well-suited for an era of tighter budgets.


"In a sense, it's more economical — but more than just theoretically economical, it's a way to have deeper magazines, because your fuel tanks become your mags," says Nevin Carr, a retired two-star admiral who preceded Klunder as head of the Office of Naval Research. (Klunder declined comment for this story.) Laser weaponry recharges by taking power from a power source like a shipboard generator. Keep adding power and the gun will keep shooting, provided that the ship isn't diverting power from its propulsion systems. (A big caveat, and one that the Navy repeatedly swears it's got covered.)

A rechargeable magazine doesn't just save the Navy money on weapons. "Now that refueling becomes rearming, it changes the logistics trail," Carr argues. "Think of all the ships that carry weapons" to warships across oceans, burning through fuel — and rising fuel costs are a problem the Navy just hasn't been able to solve.

But it's not just the possible cost savings. The Navy really thinks the technology behind laser guns is mature. In 2011, for the first time, a solid-state laser weapon burned through the outboard motor of an inflatable boat, all through choppy waters at a distance. Developing sorts of lasers, solid-state lasers that use crystals or glass to create focused beams of light, have been the Navy researchers' recent priority, rather than the relatively technologically complex, multi-wavelength Free Electron Laser that Congress came close to killing — and taking Navy laser cash with it. Last year, Klunder confidently predicted to Danger Room that laser weaponry would be ready to put aboard ships in 2014…"
Full article here.
link

Amicalement
Armand

Personal logo John the OFM Supporting Member of TMP19 Mar 2013 12:02 p.m. PST

What if the American Destroyer Escorts at Leyte Gulf had lasers when the Yamato pulled up alongside?
That would have been frikkin' awesome, Dude!

Pan Marek19 Mar 2013 12:03 p.m. PST

As if fuel didn't cost money, or come from overseas or occupy space on the ship (the space emptied of ammo will now be needed for more fuel). And of course, the COST.

Razor7819 Mar 2013 12:22 p.m. PST

Well then a nuclear powered ship (that doesn't need re-fueled for quite a long time) equipped with lasers would seem to be the perfect mating of two technologies. The only things they'd have to replenish, spare parts and food.

Lion in the Stars19 Mar 2013 12:35 p.m. PST

But that's the thing: a laser only needs ammo (ie fuel) when it's shooting. For as many deployments that don't have any shots fired, that's a mass&volume savings in favor of the laser.

And only needing to refuel is a huge boon to surface ships. Refueling at sea is the second most dangerous thing in the world (carrier ops is #1). Transferring munitions over by line is also horrifically dangerous.

Unlucky General19 Mar 2013 12:41 p.m. PST

They might want to give serious thought to renaming that ship.

Eclectic Wave19 Mar 2013 12:49 p.m. PST

A big point in favor of lasers it that they take less space then conventional weaponry, because you don't have to worry about ammo. No ammo, no armored bunkers to keep the ammo in, no worries about the ammo exploding. Saves space, saves weight which increases the fuel economy of the vessal.

Another thing to consider,a ships main gun is really only good against large, slow targets, you can't track small craft fast enough with the large guns. Not a problem for a laser. Now your main weapon can be used against all threats (including aircraft). Now you can cut the number of weapons down on your vessels, again saving weight.

captain canada19 Mar 2013 12:53 p.m. PST

And lasers are line of sight. No shooting over the horizon with a spotter.

Caesar19 Mar 2013 1:05 p.m. PST

If nothing else, they'll make the other crew go blind…

There's nothing like watching the reactions of people around the table to a gamer with a laser pointer and a shaky hand.

Micman Supporting Member of TMP19 Mar 2013 4:26 p.m. PST

Very cool.

I hope that the navy does not repeat what they did in the 50/60's with the all missile ships/planes, then have to go back and add guns.

Generalstoner4919 Mar 2013 5:26 p.m. PST

Sounds like another railgun fiasco to me.

Tgunner19 Mar 2013 5:53 p.m. PST

All I want are destroyers with frikking lasers…

Klebert L Hall20 Mar 2013 6:38 a.m. PST

Yeah, because the Navy has so much money these days….
-Kle.

Lion in the Stars20 Mar 2013 1:27 p.m. PST

More like, this project isn't one that the Navy can take funding from, Kle.

The only discretionary budgets in the entire Pentagon are Operations and Maintenance.

Deadone24 Mar 2013 4:17 p.m. PST

Are lasers vulnerable to atmospheric conditions?

Lion in the Stars24 Mar 2013 8:04 p.m. PST

Somewhat. Partially depends on frequency of the beam. IR lasers really get hammered by humidity in the air, but blue-green doesn't.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.