News UK's Wolfhound mobile laser weapon exhibits 100% drone zapping success in field trials

[Admin]

Field tests of the British Army's newest drone-destroying mobile laser weapon have reportedly enjoyed great success.

UK's Wolfhound mobile laser weapon exhibits 100% drone zapping success in field trials : Read more

 

[newtechldtech]

but from the video above it looks like skilled human operators play an important part, too.

Nope. that operator is controlling the drone with the joystick not the laser.

more over , this system is a total failure ... is very slow and cant handle a swarm , like 10+ drones at once ...

The best way to down ALL drones nearby is Electromagnetic defense with blind targeting sphere of influence . lasers cant handle all of them at once and is very expensive and very power hungry. and they should test them against drones with mirror protection as well (Military grade protection).

 

[Flayed]

Cool Elon should stick this on his Cyber Truck 😛

 

[jg.millirem]

I want consumer/business/scientific hardware coverage, not military, which is a bottomless pit of death and power projection in this broken world.

 

[helper800]

Nope. that operator is controlling the drone with the joystick not the laser.

more over , this system is a total failure ... is very slow and cant handle a swarm , like 10+ drones at once ...

The best way to down ALL drones nearby is Electromagnetic defense with blind targeting sphere of influence . lasers cant handle all of them at once and is very expensive and very power hungry. and they should test them against drones with mirror protection as well (Military grade protection).

Technically a LASER is an "Electromagnetic" defense. What do you mean specifically when you say that?

 

[USAFRet]

more over , this system is a total failure ... is very slow and cant handle a swarm , like 10+ drones at once ...

Just like everything else, baby steps.

 

[ezst036]

Maybe the UK should sell a few of these Wolfhounds to New Jersey.

 

[why_wolf]

eh really depends on how many targets at once and how quickly it can down them. I'll go out on a limp and guess its much slower than something like a Phalanx CIWS. I guess also what size drones are we talking about, little quad copters or something the size of a Predator drone?

While radio jamming is helpful, its only useful against remote controlled drones. If the drone is autonomous its far less effective. For the most advanced drones that have terrain mapping data or object recognition its completely useless.

The old german Gepard seems to be exactly the kind of mobile anti-air system you'd want for anti-drone warfare. They just need to make new models of that. No need to reinvent the wheel, a lead shield does the job.

 

[edzieba]

The old german Gepard seems to be exactly the kind of mobile anti-air system you'd want for anti-drone warfare. They just need to make new models of that. No need to reinvent the wheel, a lead shield does the job.

Gepard and similar existing SPAAG systems are too expensive: cost to take down a drone (multiple rounds expended) exceeds the cost of the drone, as per the experience in live combat in Ukraine. SPAAGs themselves are also inflexible: they require a long logistics train to operate and can do little else than take down drones in today's battlefields - ineffective against full-sized aircraft and cruise missiles, hence why they were abandoned in the first place.
The advantage of laser-based CIWS is that cost per shot is very very low, and logistics train is very simple - whatever you fuel the genset with, no special-purpose rounds required.
They do not need to take down large UAVs (Predator et al) or take down mythical drone swarms: the system needs to be able to sit within an existing combat group (and ideally be able to be mounted to existing vehicles) and take down individual drone attackers, as that is what has proven to be the threat in actual live combat. Against large UAVs, existing theatre-level air defence can continue doing its job.

The best way to think about the modern drone threat is as lower cost and slower flying TV-guided missiles, because in practical deployment that is exactly what they are used as. That comes with all the downsides of TV-guided missiles - mainly that you need an operator for each munition in flight and need to maintain a data link (so either EW superiority or optical fibre guidance limiting range).
Want to make your drones faster and able to target autonomously? Congratulations! You've just re-invented the anti-tank missile, and all the reason you were not using anti-tank missiles in the first place still apply (mainly cost, production capability, and production capacity).

 

[bit_user]

this system is a total failure ... is very slow and cant handle a swarm , like 10+ drones at once ...

What's the target acquisition time? How long does it take to knock out a drone, once targeted?

As for the swarm problem, that can be addressed by scaling the number of your defensive units and adding some communication so they can coordinate. If the system can be shrunk (and what 1st gen technology demo can't?), then you could equip each vehicle with multiple turrets.

they should test them against drones with mirror protection as well (Military grade protection).

There are other wavelengths that could be used, including microwaves (MASER). I don't know how much power you can get out of a MASER, though.

Another possibility is to use the laser to direct a guided missile, of sorts. The missile could contain an explosive warhead, rely on kinetic force, or perhaps even deploy a net on the target.

 

[newtechldtech]

Technically a LASER is an "Electromagnetic" defense. What do you mean specifically when you say that?

High electro magnetic field around the point of defense.

 

[Flayed]

Wouldn't a couple of large caliber guns mounted on a turret firing buckshot be better at taking down drones?

 

[bit_user]

Wouldn't a couple of large caliber guns mounted on a turret firing buckshot be better at taking down drones?

You mean like anti-aircraft guns? Rather than buckshot, they typically shoot explosive shells on some kind of fuse (barometric, time delay, etc.). That gives them much greater range and the ability to concentrate shrapnel in a smaller area. Given these types of guns are nothing new, I'm not really sure why they don't seem to be satisfactory against small drones.

 

[USAFRet]

I'm not really sure why they don't seem to be satisfactory against small drones.

They would be effective. In a war zone!

Every little piece of metal that comes out of the barrel, will come down somewhere.
Do we really want to be shooting up the neighborhood?

 

[80251]

Wouldn't a couple of large caliber guns mounted on a turret firing buckshot be better at taking down drones?

At short range that sounds like a good idea. Maybe even have a layered defense system -- one for taking out drones at long range and another system for taking out drones at shorter range w/your buckshot idea. Maybe a chain gun shotgun.

 

[USAFRet]

Over the ocean, the Navy has a CIWS.

Same basic 20mm Vulcan as in fighter aircraft, just a LOT more rounds, and radar guided.
75 rounds per second.

Would seeming work quite well for this.

But over the ocean, all those rounds just end up on the bottom of the ocean. Rather than through the wall of your garage.

 

[80251]

For the lighter weight plastic drones, would birdshot (maybe a lot of it) take them down? I imagine the rotor blades must be very vulnerable.

 

[USAFRet]

For the lighter weight plastic drones, would birdshot (maybe a lot of it) take them down? I imagine the rotor blades must be very vulnerable.

Lack of range.