The Future of Air Combat

The YAL used a COIL and was a megawatt class laser. HELLADS envisions a 150 kW laser on an airborne platform but as FBW points out, this would not be a fighter but something more like an AC-130 which SOCOM is pursuing at the moment. Of course there is also the B-21 which is in development and it is pretty safe to assume that it would have a DEW, or its design able to absorb a DEW solution at a later date.

The goal of the HELLADS program is to develop a 150 kilowatt (kW) laser weapon system that is ten times smaller and lighter than current lasers of similar power, enabling integration onto tactical aircraft to defend against and defeat ground threats. With a weight goal of less than five kilograms per kilowatt, and volume of three cubic meters for the laser system, HELLADS seeks to enable high-energy lasers to be integrated onto tactical aircraft, significantly increasing engagement ranges compared to ground-based systems.

In May 2015, HELLADS demonstrated sufficient laser power and beam quality to advance to a series of field tests. The achievement of government acceptance for field trials marked the end of the program’s laboratory development phase and the beginning of a new and challenging set of tests against rockets, mortars, vehicles and surrogate surface-to-air missiles at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico.

Integration of the HELLADS laser into a ground-based laser weapons system demonstrator began in July 2015 as an effort jointly funded by DARPA and the Air Force Research Laboratory. Following the field-testing phase, the goal is to make the system available to the military Services for further refinement, testing or transition to operational use.DARPA

yes, I didn’t express myself correctly.. I was thinking about equipping fighters with it.. as there was already a testbed on a large aircraft (747, from memory), but the space needed for it didn’t allow the use on small aricraft

unless I’m mistaken, this is about developing a laser system to counter incoming missiles (meaning, laser that will try to defeat missiles from close range)

It’s both. You are referring to the SHiELD system under the LANCE RFP. They are also looking at tactical (offensive) lasers, but size and power requirements will preclude fitting them to a fighter sized aircraft in the near term (AC-130 tests expected next year).

one thing.. we are speaking about laser weapons and so on.. but, unless I’m mistaken, this is about developing a laser system to counter incoming missiles (meaning, laser that will try to defeat missiles from close range). It would be a defensive system for the aircraft, not offensive to down other aircraft or attack ground targets

Or just saturate it.

Unless we already have electronically steered laser with enough power handling capacity. The easiest solution would be saturation.

Air to Air missile could be treated similarly as Solid fueled ballistic missile with hardness like 24 kJ/sqcm and when it’s gliding it could be similar as BM RV with 100Kj/sqcm hardness. 100 KW laser workin with 30 cm mirror and 2.5 micron wavelength could be effective at about 800-1500 m. Engagement time would be 1 seconds.

Maybe missiles will evolve too to become drone/missile hybrids. The USAF is trying to build a mini drone that can carry AMRAAMs and that can be mounted on heavy pylons for instance.

A similar concept but super fast would maybe to have a first stage booster with an aerodynamics more similar to a hypersonic plane ( with extendable wings ) that would stabilize in flight horizontally to maximize range and a second stage that would be supermaneuvrable, maybe HTK. The advantage is that the missile would have real wings that would produce a lot more lift than the straight pieces of metal that missile currently have.

No. Power generation got airbone long ago. Refining of present and “innovative” solutions are firmly expected in the next future. We are talking about several MW.

Probably not even MW, the initial concepts are looking at 100kW with 250kW seen as the desired start number for desired energy on target for A2G applications.

Yes and NO. Peer against peer will involves a lot of non lethal battles. To this, an opponent not targeting human aboard will gain point and momentum on the geopolitical scene where the end of conflicts will be played or half solved. Hence, non lethal targeting algorithms will be a must… and advertised. (And obviously, since the ONU is now a battle theater, coherent policy among future allies has begun to be an utmost urgency!)

I disagree. While blinding laser weapons are prohibited by convention incidental damage caused by attempting to lase a surface target is just that, incidental. Additionally, I don’t believe the convention covers viewing via enhancement.
The emergence of laser weapons may see a move towards enclosed cockpits where sensors feed all round displays. The issue is these same sensors may be capable of being blinded or damaged by the laser systems so redundancy or spectrum blocks will be required. I expect there are technical solutions to absorbing energy and minimising transmission and absorption across some wavelengths.

It has been discussed earlier, but IMOHO, missiles will close on targets without any explosive fuel left on-board: Either in a pure kinetic attempt to strike or with an air- plasma discreet guidance mode, either with a pressure driven phase change for example (solid to liquid fuel) that will prevent a laser (a thermal and phase medium) to ignite easily a missile. In any way, missiles will have to adapt but will maintain their BVR domain. Laser will simply prevent the surge of effective missile design by phasing out a lot of them coming from emerging market.

I expect we will see a move away from camouflage and see aircraft and missiles that are coated in high absorption or reflective material, perhaps even shining polished metal. Missiles could also apply rolling profiles to reduce laser impact on the same surface. We may see greater use of sub-munitions to increase the number of targets and launch of multiple missiles that impact from multiple vectors. Perhaps decoy missiles or support missiles designed to blind targeting sensors? At some point self-defensive lasers will require a recharge and that may be the avenue or opening for missiles to make it through, by simple attrition.
A change to BVR may also be a return to command guided systems, missiles guided by datalink with antennas obscured from view. Will be interesting to see how hypersonic BVR missile speeds change engagements as the missiles will already require coatings capable of handling large heat loads.
It also changes the role of support assets. A large AWACS with multiple self-defensive weapons will have a greater chance of survival closer to the forward battlespace and therefore provide command and guidance for aircraft and missiles. Of course it could all go autonomous swarm warfare as humans will simply become the weak link in warfare.

Crazy times ahead though!

Seems to me lasers will always be hostage to atmospheric conditions, or is my understanding completely outdated?

Not outdated but the specific use of the laser will impact the extent to which it is impacted by atmospheric conditions. A laser used A2A will likely have less atmospheric impact given it will likely be used at higher altitudes with thinner air. That same laser used to damage A2G targets will have greater atmospheric absorption because of the thicker/denser atmosphere at ground level.

Seems to me lasers will always be hostage to atmospheric conditions, or is my understanding completely outdated?

— Will power requirements necessitate reviving of the “heavy fighter”? (aka the Me.110 to the Me.109) In the modern era, you’d be looking at something more akin to say an F-111 becoming a mainstay rather than an F-16?

No. Power generation got airbone long ago. Refining of present and “innovative” solutions are firmly expected in the next future. We are talking about several MW. No need for a battery etc… More over, emergency Fuel to Electricity conversion solutions does exist and ready to get airborne.

— Can the aircraft themselves (and pilots within) be shielded against lasers?

Yes and NO. Peer against peer will involves a lot of non lethal battles. To this, an opponent not targeting human aboard will gain point and momentum on the geopolitical scene where the end of conflicts will be played or half solved. Hence, non lethal targeting algorithms will be a must… and advertised. (And obviously, since the ONU is now a battle theater, coherent policy among future allies has begun to be an utmost urgency!)

It has been discussed earlier, but IMOHO, missiles will close on targets without any explosive fuel left on-board: Either in a pure kinetic attempt to strike or with an air- plasma discreet guidance mode, either with a pressure driven phase change for example (solid to liquid fuel) that will prevent a laser (a thermal and phase medium) to ignite easily a missile. In any way, missiles will have to adapt but will maintain their BVR domain. Laser will simply prevent the surge of effective missile design by phasing out a lot of them coming from emerging market.

I have also mentioned that a laser can in theory be used to impact a missile plume to force it off-path.