438
submitted 4 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

South Korea is beginning the mass production of a low-cost laser weapon that has successfully shot down small drones during testing, the country’s key arms agency said Thursday.

The laser weapon, called Block-I, “can precisely strike small unmanned aerial vehicles and multicopters at close range,” a news release from South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) said.

The release did not give a cost for the weapon, but said each shot fired would only cost about $1.50.

Imagery supplied by the agency appears to show a weapon around the size of a shipping container with a laser mounted on top and what appears to be a radar or tracking device mounted on one side of the platform.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] mecfs@lemmy.world 66 points 4 months ago

They better send some to Ukraine.

Make Putler happy.

[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 28 points 4 months ago

It'd probably be great testing for them too.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 63 points 4 months ago

Will they be mounted on sharks?

They seriously need to call the platform sharks.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Best we can do are mutated sea bass

[-] Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Are they at least ill-tempered?

[-] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 38 points 4 months ago

There is no doubt that lasers will play a bigger and bigger role in combat systems, especially in a layered air defense networks.

But it's dishonest how these articles only cite the cost of electricity. It would be like citing the cost of a single shell of artillery to imply that is the only expenditure when the system is used.

Just like a Howitzer, the parts on lasers experience wear and tear, but to replace them cost a hell of a lot more than a new barrel.

Yes, in the long-term lasers will be more cost-effective than ground to air missile interceptors*, but any reporting that is clearly trying to make an argument for cost savings, should have the integrity to get figures that factor in battlefield maintenance of those systems.

*When applicable. Lasers will not remove the need for any existing systems, but will provide a cost savings by providing additional options for the air defense system's operators.

[-] jorp@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

When discussing deterrents against drone swarms the cost per "round" is the correct metric....

[-] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 months ago

The cost per round is a lot more than just power generation when talking about lasers.

The wear on tear on lasers is a lot different than other systems and when the case is being made for their cost effectiveness they need to be factored in, instead of the highly misleading figures that only prices out electricity.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

What kind of wear are we talking about? Some of the laser types I can think of don't seem like they would need to wear out.

[-] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 months ago

it's not just the laser...

It's the optics, it's the cooling, it's the physical mechanics it's built on, the laser may be pushed well over it's designed target range causing it to breakdown further.

The power supply for the laser, the circuitry for control (to some degree) and most importantly, where ever you source that energy from. Presumably a super cap bank and a generator? Maybe batteries? Who knows.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] jorp@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

I mean, sure that's fair, and the figures could be updated to include that. But the order of magnitude difference between this and explosive ammunition is 10,000x or more. Unless these are single fire, I'm not convinced it changes the calculus

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Even in the very long term, loss of equipment to enemy fire is non-negligible during active combat, so you need to tack on the purchase cost in some manner.

In the shorter term you have to buy a 30 million dollar laser system, even if you'll eventually make it back.

[-] Tja@programming.dev 8 points 4 months ago

Usually they do quote the cost per shell, not including rifle wear, she'll transport, oder wages, etc. Or missile, in case of patriot systems.

[-] Somethingcheezie@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

What about the advantages of the logistics of those “rounds”. Seems like a huge savings.

[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 31 points 4 months ago

What's the kW or MW class of laser? If it's too low, it could be ineffective against even tinfoil wrapped quad copters.

[-] thejml@lemm.ee 26 points 4 months ago
[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 15 points 4 months ago

Imagine getting a massive burn because the drone trying to bomb you reflected the laser your colleague used to try to shoot it down.

[-] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 months ago

This screams UFO encounter.

[-] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

Might still be powerful enough to blind the optics, which would effectively cripple them. Without a video feed neither FPV drones nor grenade-dropping ones would have the necessary precision to be effective.

[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 months ago

Unless they're gps guided, or they can turn their camera away from the laser source in time.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Unless they’re gps guided

These lower power DEW systems don't target the optics they target propulsion, like the actual rotors themselves. Takes about 1-2 seconds to knock them out on the ISR type drones, maybe a bit longer on the FPV type depending on size.

[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

I'd have thought the rotors would be harder to melt though because of their speed and cooling, but I guess it would work. Could you electroplate the rotors?

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 4 points 4 months ago

Could you electroplate the rotors?

I'm sure you could but the more armor you stack on the more you reduce the performance.

[-] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

GPS wouldn’t be effective at all for drones dropping munitions on infantry moving around on the battlefield, nor on FPV drones trying to fly into moving tanks or other vehicles.

And how do you turn a drone away from an infrared beam of light that would damage the drones optics almost instantly? You’d have to spot the laser system from hundreds of yards away, recognize it’s aimed at your drone, and turn away before the laser is fired. And then what? Just avoid turning your drone back the way you want to go, hoping another strategically positioned laser you didn’t see doesnt fire from a different direction?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

A buck fifty a shot at the rate I pay is about 12 ~~Kwh~~ kwH 😉 of power. That laser has got to be way up there in power.

[-] victorz@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

kWh

(I'm sorry, I have nitpicking issues.)

[-] KnightontheSun@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

What a coincidence! I have picnicking issues.

[-] victorz@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago
[-] lmaydev@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Wouldn't that cut it's communication though?

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

My coworker and I literally tried wrapping an access point in aluminum foil to replicate poor connectivity. It didn't do shit. Even completely lined a cardboard box and put it inside with zero change.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 months ago

Yeah I'm no light expert but can't they just make shilding and filters for this sort of attack vector?

[-] frezik@midwest.social 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Depends on the wavelength. Standard mirrors don't always do mirror things at wavelengths far outside the visible spectrum.

Part of the advantages of UAVs is that you can deploy a lot of them cheaply with stuff you buy on eBay. While eBay does sell some of the more exotic mirrors for CO2 laser cutters (which are far-IR wavelengths), you couldn't buy a lot of them to cover a single drone. It'd cut into the cost advantage, and would also weigh it down a lot.

[-] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 months ago

My initial reaction was that it's going to make drones more cost prohibited. Logistics of only deploying unshielded drones where there aren't lasers will probably be a thing now too.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] snooggums@midwest.social 21 points 4 months ago

Imagery supplied by the agency appears to show a weapon around the size of a shipping container with a laser mounted on top and what appears to be a radar or tracking device mounted on one side of the platform.

So, 30 million for the setup and deployment but 1.50 per drone. Plus it is huge and unweildy.

Gonna need a lot of drones to make that more cost effective than another drone with a stick or net, both of which have been effective in the defense of Ukraine.

lolThis is probably an early step towards a man portable setup so I'm just joking about the focus on the cost to fire.

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Agreed, this is definitely first gen research.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 5 points 4 months ago

Probably 2nd or 3rd gen, laser weapons have been in the works for decades.

[-] ik5pvx@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

There's a rheinmetall video on YouTube, it's a few years old already. Definitely not first gen research, and it's good there's competition already

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] FelixCress@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago

Good, now give some to Ukraine.

[-] JackDark@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago
[-] makyo@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

So would this potentially reset the battlefield and negate the disruptive changes drones had brought to it? Or does it just mean more drones and stronger drones?

[-] narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee 12 points 4 months ago

Probably a cat and mouse game

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DontAskAboutUpdog@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Shotgun, camera, 2 servos and and an esp32 is all you need

[-] bluGill@kbin.run 5 points 4 months ago

Shotguns have a useful range of about 50 meters while these are short range, is that long enough?

[-] Know_not_Scotty_does@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

You can fit a choke and longer barrel with higher caliber pellets to improve the range.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Wait...

Are drones powered by kitties?

[-] blazera@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

I hope this works how it sounds. The development of fighter planes, missiles and bombs, and drones has pretty grossly given an edge to invading militaries, able to quickly enter territory and do tremendous amounts of damage, especially to civilian life.

Being a bulky, heavy weapon with a reliance on a lot of electricity should hopefully encourage this for defensive use, and if it can keep all those flying invaders in check this could be a boon against war.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2024
438 points (99.3% liked)

World News

39102 readers
2519 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS