|
Post by princesskibble on Jul 15, 2017 20:31:38 GMT
Only radar is precise enough to hit a small spacecraft with a laser at long range, or to try and hit little individual components. An asteroid making a close approach to Earth looks like a speck of light to any passive means of detecting it. With radar astronomy we can make out it's shape. If lasers become a credible weapon of war in space maybe interplanetary fire and forget sensor fusing anti-radiation missiles will be suitable for taking them out. Then again they could be led away by radiating decoys, meaning corrections are nessecary. I really think a piloted AWACS vehicle is nessecary, you can't let missiles loose into the fog of war without guidance.
Anyway, if a laser wants to hit anything, I'm sure it needs a fire control radar. Even little plumes from the RCS of whatever is coming at you will confuse the shape to a passive IR sensor. Meanwhile you are pouring out heat as you fire and making a big target for yourself, and since missiles only have to be as accurate to a kilometer or so based on real life satellite interceptors, passive homing becomes credible even if you don't turn on your radar!
|
|
|
Post by ironclad6 on Aug 25, 2017 18:18:19 GMT
I tend to think it'll be a competition between high output lasers and high performance missiles.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 25, 2017 18:37:25 GMT
FEL's are 65% efficient, can generate femtosecond pulses, and can generate sub-nm wavelengths. The only limiting factor is how short a wavelength you can focus. I have trouble believing even missiles tipped with cassaba howitzers can compete.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 25, 2017 19:09:11 GMT
FEL's are 65% efficient, can generate femtosecond pulses, and can generate sub-nm wavelengths. The only limiting factor is how short a wavelength you can focus. I have trouble believing even missiles tipped with cassaba howitzers can compete. the missiles would have bomb-pumped lasers in the X-Ray range as well
|
|
|
Post by ironclad6 on Aug 25, 2017 19:15:49 GMT
Sure, but you can can't shoot around things.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 25, 2017 21:15:48 GMT
Sure, but you can can't shoot around things. mirrior drones for FELs and firing as soon as you have LOS for bomb pumped lasers
|
|
|
Post by ironclad6 on Aug 25, 2017 21:27:01 GMT
Hence the need for missiles. The only question is what's your payload.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 25, 2017 21:28:15 GMT
Hence the need for missiles. The only question is what's your payload. bomb pumped laser for range, Casaba Howitzer when you need to kill something into next year
|
|
|
Post by ironclad6 on Aug 25, 2017 21:29:27 GMT
Personally I favour payloadless KKVs. They have to be cheap enough that you can thrown them en masse and fast enough that they're hard to target. Propellant is cheap compared to a nuclear warhead, directional or not.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 25, 2017 21:32:22 GMT
Personally I favour payloadless KKVs. They have to be cheap enough that you can thrown them en masse and fast enough that they're hard to target. Propellant is cheap compared to a nuclear warhead, directional or not. High power pulsed lasers render conventional anti-laserarmour moot.
|
|
|
Post by ironclad6 on Aug 25, 2017 21:36:12 GMT
You are quite right about that. The only possible protection is enough, cheap enough missiles/drones/whatever to throw thousands of them and simply overwhelm your opponent's supply of fire-control channels through a combination of high delta-V and sheer number. It's basically the same approach modern anti-ship missiles take. What's the cost differential between a casaba howitzer and a kkv? It's gotta be thousands to one at least. I'll take my thousands of KKVs, you take your one NEFP and we'll see which one of us gets something through.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 25, 2017 22:12:18 GMT
You are quite right about that. The only possible protection is enough, cheap enough missiles/drones/whatever to throw thousands of them and simply overwhelm your opponent's supply of fire-control channels through a combination of high delta-V and sheer number. It's basically the same approach modern anti-ship missiles take. What's the cost differential between a casaba howitzer and a kkv? It's gotta be thousands to one at least. I'll take my thousands of KKVs, you take your one NEFP and we'll see which one of us gets something through. ah but if the KKV hits it makes a big hole and schewers a propellant tank, if a Howitzer hits you no longer have a ship, and bomb-pumped lasers are engageing at your lasers range and are punching holes though your ship
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 26, 2017 5:55:08 GMT
You are quite right about that. The only possible protection is enough, cheap enough missiles/drones/whatever to throw thousands of them and simply overwhelm your opponent's supply of fire-control channels through a combination of high delta-V and sheer number. It's basically the same approach modern anti-ship missiles take. What's the cost differential between a casaba howitzer and a kkv? It's gotta be thousands to one at least. I'll take my thousands of KKVs, you take your one NEFP and we'll see which one of us gets something through. Neither is likely to be mass-efficient. Effective range extends beyond 10 Mm, and they can fire hundreds or thousands of pulses per second. Either you have little armour and a single pulse will penetrate armour or burst propellant tanks through shock, or you have a lot less missiles.
|
|
|
Post by ironclad6 on Aug 26, 2017 6:25:15 GMT
I forget the maths but I did at one point work out that I expected to need to throw roughly four thousand missiles at someone with a free electron laser. I'm not saying it's a good idea. I'm saying it's the only option. Two armoured behemoths with giant FEL batteries squaring off from a couple of light seconds apart has something of a Jutlandian feel to it though.
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Aug 26, 2017 12:09:13 GMT
You are quite right about that. The only possible protection is enough, cheap enough missiles/drones/whatever to throw thousands of them and simply overwhelm your opponent's supply of fire-control channels through a combination of high delta-V and sheer number. It's basically the same approach modern anti-ship missiles take. What's the cost differential between a casaba howitzer and a kkv? It's gotta be thousands to one at least. I'll take my thousands of KKVs, you take your one NEFP and we'll see which one of us gets something through. Neither is likely to be mass-efficient. Effective range extends beyond 10 Mm, and they can fire hundreds or thousands of pulses per second. Either you have little armour and a single pulse will penetrate armour or burst propellant tanks through shock, or you have a lot less missiles. This is assuming you can't slip a stealth HS missile under the 10 Mm range, though. Note that the existence or even launch event of the missile doesn't necessarily needs to be undetected. Once in flight, it only needs to prevent the other side to have a precise enough detection to get a firing solution.
|
|