What's new

US navy to battle Iranian mini-ekranoplan swarms with rayguns

It makes sense because ray weapon is one field china has lots of experiences in but not so much in terms of rail gun.

There are differences between getting a laser with a high enough energy output (China has already accomplished that) and getting it efficient enough to be deployed in the field (something the U.S. is still struggling with). While China should be in the top three when it comes to laser research I am pretty sure that we won't see a fieldable version in a decade.
 
Ive seen those flying boats in pictures and do seriosly not look stealth to me they look like they cant even fit a missile on them.
 
Actually ekranoplans are very useful both for military and civilian pplications. They can carry very large payloads and they are practically invisible to radar because they fly at very low altitudes. This led to Russia to restart their research and production. You will see more "Caspian Sea Monsters" in the future.
 
your thinking that high speed torpedo’s cannot be countered is erroneous. And while Iran does have some submarines. The terrain of the persian Gulf and lack of depth is not very hospitable to them. To a well organized Navy with current ASW capabilities. enemy subs would find it very hard to survive long. Not saying that can't do some damage, becuase they could. Especially to commercial shipping.


i am not saying they cant be countered. but speed sure does make a difference. besides i hope it does not get to the point where there is an war. and my point was they cant destroy the hoot missile with that laser..? where in my sentense did i say it cant be countered all together.?
 
this is a pic of them....lol

293393-491879.jpg
 
A real laser weapon is unlike sci-fi not instant..i think high power projectiles or mini SAM would make more difference. However the Iranian ekranos are using propellers so they don't leave a heat trail.
 
A real laser weapon is unlike sci-fi not instant..i think high power projectiles or mini SAM would make more difference. However the Iranian ekranos are using propellers so they don't leave a heat trail.

Piston engines generate more than enough heat to lock on an IR missile.

I wouldn't dismiss lasers so quickly. There was a demonstration a while back where a laser system the size of a small truck popped THREE mortar shells inflight at the same time. Something similar would have no problems with what is essentially a small hobby plane. Either that, or pas out the small-arms and let sailors blast away over the rails.
 
Piston engines generate more than enough heat to lock on an IR missile.

I wouldn't dismiss lasers so quickly. There was a demonstration a while back where a laser system the size of a small truck popped THREE mortar shells inflight at the same time. Something similar would have no problems with what is essentially a small hobby plane. Either that, or pas out the small-arms and let sailors blast away over the rails.

I think you are referring to the THEL. The demonstration was made in 2001 and they also tested it against unguided rockets. Israel was thinking about adapting it as a countermeasure against the Hamas rocket strikes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's it! Thanks for finding the video. I find it impressive... both that it can acquire, track, and aim, and that the laser is punchy enough to detonate a mortar shell.

Like it or not, energy weapons are the future. Fortunately, they appear to be better suited to point defense rather than offense.
 
while it took two seconds to blow the mortar..it can keep it engaged even during motion which negates the time delay. Unless the ekrano can find a shelter to hide from preying laser!
 
U.S. Navy Amphibs 'Combat Ineffective': Pentagon Report

111410_defense_green_bay_315.JPG


A recently leaked Pentagon evaluation called the U.S. Navy's San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ships used to transport U.S. Marines and position them for beach landings "combat ineffective."

The Navy, however, says the process to correct the ships' shortcomings is already well underway and officials insist the ships are "warfare capable."

The Pentagon isn't saying much more than what its top test and evaluation official told Bloomberg News in a story posted online in late October. The Northrop Grumman-built San Antonio class, the news service quoted Michael Gilmore as saying, is "not effective, suitable and not survivable in a combat situation."

The ship, designed to transport Marine Corps forces to points offshore where those forces can move in separate vessels and aircraft toward a beachhead, is capable of operating "in a benign environment," Gilmore said.

The story cited Gilmore saying that the ships' hulls are "improved" compared with earlier classes of ships it is designed to replace. But Gilmore, the story said, told Pentagon officials in August that the class showed "poor reliability with critical equipment and control systems," an "inability to defend itself against a variety of threats" and an inability to "maintain or rapidly recover mission capability" after being hit by likely enemy weaponry. Another shortcoming: "persistent engineering deficiencies" in its anti-missile system.

The Pentagon declined to provide Defense News with the Pentagon's specific conclusions on the survivability of the beleaguered ship class. "The details of the study are classified," said Cheryl Irwin, a spokeswoman. "However, we have said that this ship is more survivable than the one it is replacing."

Navy spokeswoman Lt. Callie Ferrari told Bloomberg that "the majority of corrective actions … are in process." Later, the Navy softened that response, saying it's taking steps to "improve the ships' survivability in a combat situation," Lt. Courtney Hillson said. Hillson declined to discuss specifics.

The original study on which the conclusions were drawn is somewhat dated. Navy and Marine Corps evaluators intermittently examined the war-fighting capabilities of the class under the direction of the Pentagon's director of operational test and evaluation between February 2007 and December 2008, Hillson said. Irwin said Gilmore drew his conclusions from the services' findings and his own.

Five of the ships have been commissioned. Four ships are under construction; a total of 11 ships are planned.
 
Back
Top Bottom