Iron Beam laser air-defense system

Investment Analysis Clubs Macro Economic Trends and Risks
1

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/israel-iron-beam-laser…

Israeli Lasers and American Defense
The Iron Beam can intercept drones and other threats of our age.

By The Editorial Board, The Wall Street Journal

Israel’s Iron Beam laser air-defense system was declared operational Wednesday after final tests intercepting rockets, mortars and drones. …

The Iron Beam is said to burn or fry targets from up to about six miles away. Interceptions take seconds, and with a constant energy source lasers don’t run out of ammunition. Israel expects delivery of the system by the end of the year.

Officials estimate the marginal cost of a laser interception at a few dollars. By contrast, Israel’s Iron Dome costs some $50,000 a pop and its Arrow system $2 million or more. Given that Hezbollah fired more than 10,000 rockets at Israel during the recent war, and was prevented from getting off perhaps 100,000 more, bending the cost curve is imperative.

Laser systems aren’t a replacement for conventional air defenses. At present they have trouble in low-visibility conditions, and electronic components of drones can be hardened to withstand their attacks at long range. Anduril President Christian Brose told us his U.S. defense firm sees directed-energy interception as a “close-in weapon system of last resort.”… [end quote]

Here is more detail.
https://gemini.google.com/app/7cf13d98b3c82033

Layered Defense: Iron Beam is designed to complement (not replace) Israel’s existing missile defense systems. It is expected to handle the lower-cost, high-volume threats, reserving the more expensive missile interceptors for higher-value targets or longer-range threats.

The manufacturing and development of the Iron Beam system involve a collaboration between two major Israeli defense contractors. It will be manufactured in Israel.

The first military drones were invented and manufactured in Israel to lower the risk to fighter pilots. Of course, that was decades ago and the superpowers now build giant drones. I’m sure the Iron Beam will be imitated by all militaries.

Wendy

9 Likes
2

There’s just one problem with lasers. They bounce off of reflective surfaces. Missles with mirror cases inbound!

Probably works fine on drones though as I’m not at all sure how to “mirror-finish” all components.

4 Likes
3

Yes, lasers can cut through mirrored metals, though it’s challenging due to high reflectivity that can damage the laser equipment. Modern fiber lasers are more effective at cutting reflective materials like aluminum, brass, and silver than older CO2 lasers because they use optical fibers instead of mirrors to direct the beam, reducing reflections. Specialized cutting heads and self-protection systems within laser machines also help mitigate damage.

  • Optimized Parameters:

Adjusting laser power, speed, and focal point can improve absorption and prevent excessive reflections.

  • Beam Absorbers:

Covering the reflective surface with an absorbing layer can prevent reflections and protect the laser.

You cannot apply a physical beam absorber at a distance, but the effect of absorbing a laser beam can occur remotely through atmospheric effects or by using an optical system to project an absorbent medium. For a true remote absorption effect, the laser's energy must be dissipated by interacting with a material or medium that is already present at the target location.
4

Your AI gibberish response is not linked to weaponized lasers, but does provide great insights to micro field laser machining processes. (AI problems)

Also, my comment was written to be dripping with comic cynism.

Since you’re not the expert (neither am I), we can continue our absurd discussion freely about the internet, however.

6 Likes
5

I am not an expert, either. However, I do know that lasers transfer energy to any surface that reflects them. In ordinary civilian life, that is relatively trivial. But with a weapon that imparts enough energy fast enough to destroy a target, any reflective surface would heat very quickly and be destroyed, thereby destroying the target.

I do not know if the lag would be on the order of a few seconds, or a few milliseconds. I’m guessing you’d buy yourself a few milliseconds of extra life before the target was destroyed.

2 Likes
6

LMAO, Yep no claim to expertise on this.

Seems you are “just trying to make political points”. LOL

7

There are many things not indicated in the “press release”, most of the pretty important.

For one, a laser beam disperses with distance due to dust, moisture and other particulate contaminants, that’s why they say “up to 4 miles”. At that range, it can take from 4-10 seconds of concentration to create enough heat to cause damage - an. Interval which is unlikely with an incoming artillery shell (possible, probably, with a slower moving drone.)

But yes, a mirrored surface will extend the required dwell time - but fear not for the reflectees, that reflected beam will be bouncing all over the place.

As the target gets closer the beam is more powerful and the required dwell time reduced, but it’s till not going to be instantaneous, you’re going to have to hit, stay, move on, acquire, aim, hit another, and so on. I have no idea how many target you might engage, but it’s not going to be hundreds. (Again, incoming artillery or bombs will give less time than slower flying drones.)

During World War II we discovered that dropping loads of aluminum foil strips (chaff) would make radar go crazy, and later we developed countermeasures against heat tracking with flares and so on, I would expect an incoming drone squad to do something similar: one or two of the drones in the invasion would launch dozens, hundreds of fake target drones for distraction (each amplified to appear to the targeting technology as a real, live warheaded drone) while dozens or hundreds of others would come in and do the damage they’re paid to do.

I’m not saying that this Iron Beam technology isn’t cool (and effective), just that it’s likely to be countered by other technology and tricks, as technologies always are. It’s not the end. It’s likely to be closer to the beginning than anything.

3 Likes
8

Yes. It’s a never-ending game of one-ups-manship with the military. Sometimes things are obsolete before they can even be fielded.

Yes, dwell time for a high-powered laser is on the order of a few seconds. OK for missiles (not hypersonic…a few seconds is forever in hypersonic terms), great for drones. I’m not sure if it would be practical for artillery. Factors include speed of target, atmospheric conditions, power of the laser.

For drones specifically, I was reading about a microwave system that can down dozens of drones at once by projecting a powerful microwave field that fries the electronics of anything unfortunate enough to enter the region of effect. I’m aware of the Leonidas system, but I’m sure there are others.

9

It’s cool … and it’s effective for the cases it is meant for. However, I highly doubt that it’ll ever operate standalone. It’s real purpose is to reduce the overall cost of air defense. Instead of using a $50,000 iron dome type missile, a $2 to $5 burst of light will be used for the cases in which it can be used. With any luck, a good percentage of incoming stuff can be handled with iron beam ($2), and then iron dome ($50k) can handle most of the rest, and then Arrow ($1+M) if necessary. The systems work more or less in concert with each other.

2 Likes