During the tests, LaWS – a collaborative effort between ONR, Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Research Laboratory, Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division and industry partners – hit targets mounted aboard a speeding oncoming small boat, shot a Scan Eagle unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) out of the sky, and destroyed other moving targets at sea.
“At less than a dollar per shot, there’s no question about the value LaWS provides,” said Klunder.
Its nice to see the Navy is concerned about costs maybe they will scrap a few of their over priced aircraft carriers next?/s From the article we know they can sink a boat no word what kind or how fast the boat was going but we do know the ScanEagle Drone has a top speed of 92 miles per hour and the Navy Laser shot one down that sure sounds impressive!
ScanEagle carries a stabilized electro-optical and/or infrared camera on a lightweight inertial stabilized turret system, and an integrated communications system having a range of over 62 miles (100 km); it has a flight endurance of over 20 hours. ScanEagle has a 10.2-foot (3.1 m) wingspan a length of 4.5 feet (1.4 m) and a mass of 44 pounds (20 kg) and can operate up to 80 knots (92 mph; 150 km/h), with an average cruising speed of 48 knots (55 mph; 89 km/h).
Until you realize that Iran has anti ship missiles like the Sunburn that go Mach 2.1
According to one report, when the Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani visited Moscow in October 2001 he requested a test firing of the Sunburn, which the Russians were only too happy to arrange. So impressed was Ali Shamkhani that he placed an order for an undisclosed number of the missiles.The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes “violent end maneuvers” to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution not enough time to take out the intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000 depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy an intruder “just in time.”. A single one of these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter jet. Although the Navy has been phasing out the older Phalanx defense system, its replacement, known as the Rolling Action Missile (RAM) has never been tested against the weapon it seems destined to one day face in combat. Implications For US Forces in the Gulf
Need more proof
the Army and Navy programs. The shipboard LaWS generates just 33 kilowatts of laser energy and still manages to shoot down slow-moving drones in tests; the Navy wants to build a follow-up model generating roughly 60 to 100 kw, potentially mounted on the small Littoral Combat Ship or the mid-sized Arleigh Burke destroyer. The Army, meanwhile, is looking at laser defense platoons with either three 100-kw lasers mounted on large trucks or five 50-kw lasers mounted on smaller Stryker armored vehicles.
These power levels can take out cruise missiles, drones, and manned aircraft at ranges of a few miles. Longer ranges would require hundreds of kilowatts, however, and killing a ballistic missile in boost phase would take about a thousand kilowatts — one megawatt or more. An ICBM warhead, designed to survive the heat of reentry, is practically laser-proof.
My bold notice the Navy would have to double the power of their lasers to take out cruise missiles ,drones, and manned aircraft in other words the Navy’s laser system being tested in the Persian Gulf is a child’s toy. It would take one megawatt or more to take out a ballistic missile in boost phase China it just so happens has a ballistic anti ship missile. Never mind swarm tactics if enough cheaper, older, slower, missiles can all be fired at the same time at any target any missile defense system can be overwhelmed trying to shoot down to many targets at once. Ask the Navy how many Super Sonic Sunburn missiles at a time can their laser heck their laser and all the anti missile defense systems they have on their best ship can stop at the same time. Not asking these questions would be unpatriotic, screaming Hurah! because we have a laser that can shoot down a drone plane slower than a Toyota Camary is like having the cheerleaders go out on the field after you lose a game. never mind the laser is not combat tested as it stands now we would lose depending on that toy. Its an interesting toy call me when it can shoot down 3 sunburn’s all launched at the same time at one ship, call me when its something we can use because its something we need.
As far as Iron Dome goes Please Israel stop wasting America’s Money you have been getting aid money for decades, you give all your people healthcare with our money even though all Americans don’t have healthcare. You could have used the money we gave you to desalinate water turn deserts into farmland and had enough green land for Jew and Palestinian instead you waste our money on this crap.
the actual success rate for the Dome falls much closer to a miserable 5 percent.
The proof of those collisions is out there, says Postol, and it will reveal itself in the future in form of increased insurance claims for property damage. If the Israeli government were eager to show the Dome’s effectiveness, they could just release verifiable insurance claim numbers and put the issue to bed, says Postol. But “The Israelis have been unable to provide any evidence of any reduction in ground damage that would surely have to accompany the amazing success rates that they have been claiming.”
In other words, the Iron Dome missiles must approach rockets head-on, or the probability of intercepting them drops to virtually zero. This is due to the nature of the interceptors’ warhead, which is not in the nose of the missile but a third of the length down.
When very close to its target, the interceptor will detonate, sending a shower of steel rods out to the side of the missile to destroy the rocket. The only way these rods can successfully hit a rocket warhead is when the interceptor comes up to meet the rocket and passes just by it. Attempting to hit the rocket side-on will have virtually no chance of success.
Jeremy Binnie of IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly has alleged that “Iron Dome is intercepting a significantly lower proportion of rockets than 2012?, during Israel’s last large-scale military offensive on Gaza. Biddle said this is probably because “the system has been improved and can ignore more rockets that aren’t a threat”.
“We don’t know how the [Israeli army] is defining what is a ‘successful’ intercept. Is it counting every time a rocket is hit, or every time its payload is destroyed? There is a big difference,” Binnie told Al Jazeera.
Four Israeli civilians – Israeli citizens, and a Thai worker – have been killed so far in the Gaza war. However, fewer civilians were killed during the 2008-2009 Israeli offensive in Gaza, dubbed Operation Cast Lead, before the missile defence system was operationally deployed.
So you have an MIT professor agreeing with an analyst for Jane’s that Iron Dome does not work I suppose you can argue with Jane’s they only have been the expert writers about all the world’s weapons for decades. MIT well just what do they know about technology./S
But in the Real World if more people die after your rocket system to protect them is deployed than before it was deployed I’d call that a failure you actually did worse than Random Chance! Just what Bibi really did with all that money that could have been used to protect Israel is an intersting question. Bribe the American Congress to give him the money Quid a Priori the Pro Quo of a functioning weapons system that wink wink did worse than random chance its first time out and functioned at a 5% success rate during the latest Palestinian rocket attacks.
In my world 5% is the margin of error