• geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 hours ago

    It’s not about power efficiency. Lasers require focussing a lot of light at one certain point. But the further the distance the more the light spreads. That’s just physics. Communicating with lasers isn’t the same as burning stuff with them.

    Lasers are also utterly doomed when the sky isn’t clear because mist and clouds can fracture the concentrated light

    As for intercepting missiles: If you’ve seen the speed at which hypersonic missiles come down you’ll find a laser doesn’t have much time to burn it.

    Israel has been bragging about their epic laser tech for multiple years now yet they’re still firing interceptors. A laser might be able to defend one single static target in a 1km range from drones but not a whole border. And swarm tactics can still overwhelm the laser and just destroy it

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 minutes ago

      Yes, and that’s literally where power comes in. The more powerful the laser, the further it stays coherent. Again, these are literally being used in combat right now. And they’re not intercepting missiles, they’re intercepting slow flying drones. What I was saying is that it’s much cheaper to power a laser than to make an interceptor.

      Americans also can’t figure out how to make hypersonics, but Russia, China, Iran, and DPRK can. Just because the reich can’t do something, doesn’t mean it’s not possible.