Are IR Guided Missiles in Trouble?

Thanks.

Right now they’re to bulky to be fitted to FJs – unless they manage to fuse a sensor system like DAS/MLD with the laser itself.

All the DIRCMs I’ve seen have been on transport aircraft & helicopters. Have any been fitted to fast jets?

Doesn’t make any sense.

Laser (and computing) power needed to fool (and perhaps destroy) IR homing sensors is several orders of magnitude smaller than power that would “burn a hole” in a highly reflective and heat resistant surface of missile moving at Mach 2+. And then you have high probability of blinding and burning something on the ground (including your own troops).

I guess for the first something like DVD burner laser is sufficient, while for the latter Snow Monkey is correct to assume that it would only be feasible for something like B-2.

And yes, everybody should be working on laser “weaponry” and countermeasures as of now. I’ve attended presentation of study of materials that would allow laser beam only out and not inside the device. And that was like 5 years ago or more.

My point was DIRCMs aren’t that widespread right now and that by the time they are they will probably have solidstate lasers to the point where it would be feasible to backfit the beam generator. The directing and detecting mechanism would already be in place. You don’t need a four foot diameter, megawatt class beam to damage an AAM. Punch an inch or two diameter hole anywhere in the thing and you’re likely to hit something important beneath it.

see also: http://www.scorpion.com.gr/manta.asp

I was reading an article about the new laser based countermeasures systems that are being developed to dupe the guidance mechanism of IR guided missiles by targeting the guidance head with a laser to confuse the missile.

“Being developed”? The system is called LAIRCM, and its been in service for a while now.

At such a point, yes, of course.
I don’t think ANY fighter platforms at this point really have power-system provisioning for such high power lasers, though.
(Such a system seems more viable as a bomber/larger aircraft countermeasure/defense system, at least in the near-er term…)
I wonder if the PAKFA program is at least leaving “growth margin” for such things…?

I know for a fact that the lift fan cavity on the F-35A/C has been quoted as a possible point for the installation of a retractable upper and/or lower laser director turret in the past, and that the aircraft does have the electrical power to spare from the F135/6 for at least a small weapon. That said the engineering challenges are still enormous and laser technology isn’t really where it needs to be yet. I wouldn’t personally expect anything before 2030 even at the testbed stage, but it’s interesting to theorise what we might end up with by the middle of the century.
I strongly doubt whether Russia will integrate anything like it into PAK FA, though. It just doesn’t seem ‘their style’, for want of a better term. Moreover, if they’re trying to keep the weight below that of a Flanker, retain a high internal fuel fraction, possess a large weapons bay, and retain supermanoeuvrability, then logically it would seem to me like they won’t have much space or weight left for upgrades. Where laser tech is at the moment it would have to be structurally designed from the outset to have the fairings/turret ports required for self-defensive lasers, and I can’t see any method of having them that wouldn’t destroy its stealth. That said I have a couple of fascinating concepts, which I will post if I can get permission from the author, that would make an interesting discussion point.

By the time they get to that point ALL AAMs will have a questionable effectiveness as it’s just a matter of bumping the power up to put a hole in it.

Doesn’t make any sense.

Laser (and computing) power needed to fool (and perhaps destroy) IR homing sensors is several orders of magnitude smaller than power that would “burn a hole” in a highly reflective and heat resistant surface of missile moving at Mach 2+. And then you have high probability of blinding and burning something on the ground (including your own troops).

I guess for the first something like DVD burner laser is sufficient, while for the latter Snow Monkey is correct to assume that it would only be feasible for something like B-2.

And yes, everybody should be working on laser “weaponry” and countermeasures as of now. I’ve attended presentation of study of materials that would allow laser beam only out and not inside the device. And that was like 5 years ago or more.

At such a point, yes, of course.
I don’t think ANY fighter platforms at this point really have power-system provisioning for such high power lasers, though.
(Such a system seems more viable as a bomber/larger aircraft countermeasure/defense system, at least in the near-er term…)
I wonder if the PAKFA program is at least leaving “growth margin” for such things…?

By the time they get to that point ALL AAMs will have a questionable effectiveness as it’s just a matter of bumping the power up to put a hole in it.