Directed Energy Weapons Against Aircraft
05-24-2020, 02:32 PM
#11
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,232
Originally Posted by Excargodog
Chemical lasers. You’d be amazed the power you can store in the right chemicals. You keeping abreast of the new small torpedoes under development?
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...avy-submarines
Exotic chemical combinations - in this case a solid block of lithium that then gets bathed in sulfur hexafluoride gas - produce enormous power without the need for much electricity.
And for chemical lasers, heat is far less of an issue. For that matter they might be one-time use - like a missile.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/art...ns_110966.html
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...avy-submarines
Exotic chemical combinations - in this case a solid block of lithium that then gets bathed in sulfur hexafluoride gas - produce enormous power without the need for much electricity.
And for chemical lasers, heat is far less of an issue. For that matter they might be one-time use - like a missile.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/art...ns_110966.html
My gut sense is that DE will make bigger inroads, faster, in surface installations or ground vehicles. For aircraft there's a lot of power and cooling issues which have to be overcome... for a bottomless magazine which is only useful until you run out of gas. Surface applications don't have the endurance problem, so they benefit from a bottomless magazine. Especially fixed emplacements and nuclear powered warships (DE might even instigate the return of nuclear power to navy cruisers).
05-24-2020, 03:03 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by FNGFO
I’m pretty sure the empty space vacated by the lift fan in the F-35A is still set up to use the lift fan transmission to create power for directed energy weapons.
There is no lift fan in the F-35A.
Now if you mean the USMC version, the F-35B, then we can save a lot fo space by just getting rid of the airplane altogether!
05-24-2020, 04:52 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,788
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
Funny!
There is no lift fan in the F-35A.
Now if you mean the USMC version, the F-35B, then we can save a lot fo space by just getting rid of the airplane altogether!
There is no lift fan in the F-35A.
Now if you mean the USMC version, the F-35B, then we can save a lot fo space by just getting rid of the airplane altogether!
05-24-2020, 05:28 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by FNGFO
Yes, the “empty space vacated”, as in I know it’s not in the A model, by the lift fan is set up with the gearbox still in place to power a directed energy weapon.
05-24-2020, 07:08 PM
#16
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,482
The F-111 Aardvark (McNamara’s SECOND folly) had technology that really pushed (and perhaps even pushed past) what technology could do at the time in a whole lot of its components, technology soon to be replaced by just finding a better technology altogether.p. Originally, it had some of the most capable (if unreliable) analog computers ever built. But when those analog computers were replaced by digital ones that took a tiny fraction of the electrical output, it had enough power to operate some serious jammers, and as the “Spark Vark” the EF-111 was really pretty capable in that role - as long as the rest of the aircraft happened to be working that day.
05-26-2020, 06:06 AM
#17
Get me outta here...
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Boeing right seat
Posts: 1,541
Originally Posted by Excargodog
Chemical lasers. You’d be amazed the power you can store in the right chemicals.
05-27-2020, 07:10 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,979
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Yes you might be able to get away with chemical lasers with one-time cartridges, or even fluid charges... assuming it can be made to give more bang for the weight/volume as missiles or 20mm.
My gut sense is that DE will make bigger inroads, faster, in surface installations or ground vehicles. For aircraft there's a lot of power and cooling issues which have to be overcome... for a bottomless magazine which is only useful until you run out of gas. Surface applications don't have the endurance problem, so they benefit from a bottomless magazine. Especially fixed emplacements and nuclear powered warships (DE might even instigate the return of nuclear power to navy cruisers).
My gut sense is that DE will make bigger inroads, faster, in surface installations or ground vehicles. For aircraft there's a lot of power and cooling issues which have to be overcome... for a bottomless magazine which is only useful until you run out of gas. Surface applications don't have the endurance problem, so they benefit from a bottomless magazine. Especially fixed emplacements and nuclear powered warships (DE might even instigate the return of nuclear power to navy cruisers).
05-27-2020, 07:43 AM
#20
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,232
Originally Posted by badflaps
I was flying one night over Mountain Home with an old "111er." He said you don't want to live there, lest a "Vark" fall on you.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
