Register Free

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A-60 and YAL-1 airborne laser versus F-35.

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mig-31bm
    Rank 5 Registered User

    A-60 and YAL-1 airborne laser versus F-35.

    Click image for larger version  Name:	BpFKYjv_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium.jpg Views:	1 Size:	27.1 KB ID:	3842727Click image for larger version  Name:	yal11.gif Views:	1 Size:	430.6 KB ID:	3842724


    ABL will be the world's first boost-phase defense against theater ballistic missiles similar to those used against U.S. troops during the Gulf War.

    The first shipset of six ABL Infrared Search and Track (IRST) sensors, a derivative of the proven F-14 IRST sensor, were delivered to Boeing by Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control of Orlando, Fla. Four of the six sensors were sent to Wichita, Kan., where Boeing is extensively modifying a 747-400 Freighter into the ABL weapon-system platform. Two sensors were delivered to Boeing in Seattle for integrated testing with missile-tracking software now under development.

    The IRST sensors together comprise the ABL's wide-area surveillance subsystem and are to maintain 360-degree surveillance over hundreds of miles from the aircraft while on mission. Once the sensors make an initial detection of a boosting theater ballistic missile, the detection information is sent to the battle management command, control, communication, computers and intelligence (BMC4I) tracker. It will use that information to track the missile's trajectory, and send commands to another surveillance component, the active ranging system (ARS). ARS provides mission personnel with a highly accurate 3D track of its missile target.
    Click image for larger version  Name:	033502.jpg Views:	1 Size:	214.1 KB ID:	3842721
    Click image for larger version  Name:	1487931828486.jpg Views:	1 Size:	80.9 KB ID:	3842722


    Forum is a bit dead lately so let stir things up.
    Imagine you are the pilot of an F-35, tasked with the job to shot down an unknown airborne laser weapon ( based on either A-60 or YAL-1) in your country airspace, you do this alone, no other support for you or them
    How will you do it? What tactic
    What weapon will you choose to equip your fighter with?
    let discuss
    Last edited by mig-31bm; 4th December 2018, 15:57.
  • garryA
    Rank 5 Registered User

    #2
    A-60 has no radar or rwr and the targeting control LIDAR only cover forward sector, I don't know the exact range of Lidar but presumably, it is shorter than the distance that APG-81 can track a target as big as A-60.
    Tactic: after initial detection, reduce altitude and re-approach from A-60's beam or tail.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	turn.png
Views:	1
Size:	27.1 KB
ID:	3842777
    Last edited by garryA; 5th December 2018, 01:51.

    Comment

    • moon_light
      Rank 5 Registered User

      #3
      F-35 launch CHAMP (JASSM-ER) from extended range, minimal IR and RF signature of JASSM-ER will hide it from sensors of YAL-1, when close enough, we zap them with EMP beam.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsQWWQFQWkA

      Click image for larger version  Name:	jassm-agm-158-missile-3d-model-low-poly-max-obj-3ds-fbx-mtl.jpg Views:	1 Size:	95.6 KB ID:	3842784
      Last edited by moon_light; 5th December 2018, 07:47.

      Comment

      • St. John
        Rank 3 Registered User

        #4
        Laser in atmosphere has very limited range. About 10km for 1MW. That's useless against Meteors and AMRAAMs, or even ASRAAMs and Sidewinders.

        Comment

        • mig-31bm
          Rank 5 Registered User

          #5
          Effective range is much longer, even for 100kW system
          Btw,about being useless:
          Development in the United States has seen the system tested in 1981, when researchers had mounted the system to a KC-135 Stratotanker and successfully destroyed 5 AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles and a simulated cruise missile
          Last edited by mig-31bm; 5th December 2018, 16:26.

          Comment

          • St. John
            Rank 3 Registered User

            #6
            I read a study on using them as a CIWS and for a 10km range, an estimated 1MW was required, but I guess that does focus on sea level engagements where the air is denser. I guess if we multiply by 4 to allow for the change in air density and assume that beam divergence is not a factor then 40km could be possible. But the problem is that with beam divergence the power density at twice the range is quartered, so you need 4x the power for twice the range and an A-60 is no small aircraft. Then you have the problem of one large aircraft vs 4, 6 or 8 smaller fighters who will all be firing missiles, while this laser is taking many seconds to cook its way through one aircraft. I'm also not sure how to interpret those results. 39kW across say 5m^2 isn't that much per square cm, in fact it's less than 1W per cm^2 or less than a laser pointer. Is that really effective at much besides annoying the pilot?
            Last edited by St. John; 5th December 2018, 17:29.

            Comment

            • mig-31bm
              Rank 5 Registered User

              #7
              You are assuming the laser has no focus, and simply a normal laser beam. But the beam is focused
              https://www.scribd.com/document/2602...tical-Aviation

              Comment

              • stealthflanker
                Rank 5 Registered User

                #8
                No difference than engaging AEW or other large aircraft. Both YAL and A-60 are large aircraft with large RCS and potentially large heat signature too due to need of exhaust for cooling their laser assembly.

                The laser makes no difference. You will need about 25MW, 3 m mirror assembly to engage aircraft target (25 Kj/sqm hardness) at 250 Km in 1 second engagement. If you desire capability against typical aircraft we have. 100 KW of same laser will do the same but at 1 Minute, meaning you have to aim for a full 1 minute against that target and there could be another one launching missile at you. Smaller mirror assembly will obviously doing less, meaning you have to illuminate the target much longer to obtain the necessary fluence. 1m diameter mirror with 100 KW laser will need 10 Minutes to get enough fluence to do the same job.

                Comment

                • mig-31bm
                  Rank 5 Registered User

                  #9
                  How about 1 m diameter mirror with 2 Mw output such as YAL-1 and A-60
                  anyway, If it takes 1 minute for 100 kW laser to destroy an aircraft from 250 km, that is a very short amount of time, for comparison, you need a missile constantly moving at Mach 12 to do the same thing, and missile can be evaded but you can't evade a laser beam. Furthermore, that beam will blind the pilot immediately.

                  Comment

                  • stealthflanker
                    Rank 5 Registered User

                    #10
                    yeah, but that assume the aircraft is not maneuvering and your tracking system and whatever actuator controls the mirror assembly can follow if it maneuver.

                    and remember. You may face multiple aircrafts and multiple missiles. 1 minute may just not be practical and remember that missile can also come from the side not covered by the laser.

                    Comment

                    • St. John
                      Rank 3 Registered User

                      #11
                      MiG-31 I'm going by your own image which plots the power on target at specified ranges with specified laser powers. E.g. at 20km range with a 1000kW laser, the power on target is 39kW.

                      Ah okay, page 54 last para gives specifics. At 5km the spot size is 75cm^2, so at 20km it will be 16x75cm2 = 1200cm^2. With a 100kW laser Figure 28 shows 39kW on that target area at 10,000m altitude and 20km range. So that is 32.5W/cm^2. After many minutes that could probably cook a turkey. To get a useful 1kW/cm^2, you would need approximately 3MW and 20km would hardly keep you safe from MRAAMs or LRAAMs.
                      Last edited by St. John; 6th December 2018, 10:43.

                      Comment

                      • stealthflanker
                        Rank 5 Registered User

                        #12
                        The thing is that. As long as we still using mechanically steered laser. You would want the biggest power and mirror assembly you can get.

                        We are not yet in era where laser is electronically steered. Maybe then we can actually engage multiple targets and "time share" the laser so the beam will always point at hopefully same spot.

                        Anyway. I put my calculations in an excel spreadsheet long time ago :

                        http://www.mediafire.com/file/r25cdq...Calc.xlsx/file

                        It based on "Physics of Societal Issue"

                        You can trade off various parameters namely power, engagement time, target hardness and mirror assembly size. Wavelengths and radiation absorbed by target too.
                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Tradeoff laser.png
Views:	1
Size:	110.9 KB
ID:	3842933

                        For radiation absorbed by target, you can use following chart

                        http://www.eepw.com.cn/article/201604/289592.htm
                        Last edited by stealthflanker; 6th December 2018, 10:54. Reason: addition of excel spreadsheet

                        Comment

                        • TomcatViP
                          Rank 5 Registered User

                          #13
                          Magneto optic is blooming

                          Comment

                          • St. John
                            Rank 3 Registered User

                            #14
                            Phased array lasers have been invented but that doesn't solve the problem of atmospheric attenuation or beam divergence.

                            Comment

                            • stealthflanker
                              Rank 5 Registered User

                              #15
                              You dont solve natural factor. can only have partial remedy. or constrain the operational scenario of the laser.



                              Comment

                              • mig-31bm
                                Rank 5 Registered User

                                #16
                                St. John
                                Firstly, the image is for 100 kW laser, 20 times weaker than YAL-1s laser
                                Secondly, you are treating a FOCUS laser beam the same as a radar beam aka beam spot getting bigger with distance but that not how it work. You burn target at your focal point. The area of the melting spot will actually get smaller until the focal point, that why they need those massive lens

                                Comment

                                • mig-31bm
                                  Rank 5 Registered User

                                  #17
                                  stealthflanker : I think it is very easy for the lens/beam to follow a maneuver aircraft at long distance, because the angular velocity is very small. If the aircraft was moving at 2000 km/h (0.55 km/s) tangent to the optics and the distance is 250 km, the angular velocity is only 0.13 degrees/second

                                  Comment

                                  • St. John
                                    Rank 3 Registered User

                                    #18
                                    Okay, that's interesting but can they vary the focal point? Can they put the focal point at any range? The other point which I think stealthflanker is getting at is how to aim your laser at fighters 20+km away. +/- 1 millirad gives +/- 20m left, right, up and down, could you usefully aim at an F-35/F-22 at 100km?

                                    Comment

                                    • mig-31bm
                                      Rank 5 Registered User

                                      #19
                                      You can move the focal point by moving the lens, it is similar to how you zoom in and out

                                      Comment

                                      • garryA
                                        Rank 5 Registered User

                                        #20
                                        stealthflanker
                                        The laser makes no difference. You will need about 25MW, 3 m mirror assembly to engage aircraft target (25 Kj/sqm hardness) at 250 Km in 1 second engagement. If you desire capability against typical aircraft we have. 100 KW of same laser will do the same but at 1 Minute, meaning you have to aim for a full 1 minute against that target and there could be another one launching missile at you. Smaller mirror assembly will obviously doing less, meaning you have to illuminate the target much longer to obtain the necessary fluence. 1m diameter mirror with 100 KW laser will need 10 Minutes to get enough fluence to do the same job.
                                        Can 100 kW laser with 30 cm diameter mirror blind IR sensor from 50 km away?
                                        Click image for larger version

Name:	power reqired to damage optic.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	85.5 KB
ID:	3843011

                                        Comment

                                        Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                        Collapse

                                         

                                        Working...
                                        X