That is a Final Boss name. They probably edited out the scene with his corporate legal counsel Mr Slicktalk McLiar and his head accountant Mr Beancounter.
@@soulei1990 Mirrors work on low powered visible light spectrum lasers. These are lasers that go very far beyond that. Mirrors do not work on lasers like this.
проблема государственного управления в том что система ущербна: сегодня чем больше ты тратишь - тем ты более важный начальник, это вынуждает швыряться деньгами, подрядчики которые занимаются ерундой дают самые большие взятки.
That's NOT how DEFENCE SALES work. Civilians can't buy this, only certain government agencies could. AND those government agencies most certainly 100% DO NOT shop for defence products on YT. If a government agency had a requirement for a laser based anti drone system they would put out a tender for contract or they would contact the company and get the classified specs and the real salesmen, which is likely many people and a protracted process. They're CERTAINLY NOT looking to buy high end military kit on YT lol... especially not a WSJ video.
@@homebase5934 Consumers can’t buy prescription meds without a doctor prescribing them. Yet… You weren’t rude, so I won’t be either. Just ask yourself why an officer of this company would do an interview and provide WSJ video of their system in operation.
Unfortunately that's the way capitalism works, decisions made by people who don't use the product based upon information from sales people who did not design it and don't use it.
@@NJ-wb1cz That's going to work great on insects that are deaf. Not to mention YT audio codecs are meant for people. Those lights don't really work either. You need chemicals for camouflage, also poison.
2 mile of range, 15 seconds to destroy a target, unless it can lock and shot while moving, it can be easily overwhelmed by 16 drones traveling at 30mph.
15 seconds is only at 2 miles, which is close to the maximum effective range. As the targets get closer, the beam becomes more potent. At close range, the beam could destroy a target in just a few seconds.
@@dwaneanderson8039 laser beam does not diverge that much. Inverse square law does not apply here. Normal atmosphere is also transparent enough. The targeting can get easier for closer drones for sure but I’ve already generously assumed zero targeting time in the calculation.
I wonder what the impact on dwell time would be if the adversary uses a low-tech approach like painting vulnerable surfaces of the drone with a reflective material. Moreover, can this thing even perform rapidly successive interceptions, or does it need time to recharge its battery/capacitors from the Stryker's alternator?
@@NoneOfYourBeesWax1 Yes, but 2 mile is way too close. My guess for the 2 mile limit is more likely to be from the targeting system. I am surprised that they demonstrated visual targeting manually using a controller and somehow phrased it as a selling point. I expected fully automatic target detection with visual and laser/radar of some kind as input and advanced machine learning to recognize and mark the potential targets. The only human input should be confirming or picking the target candidates to shot.
Naa, it would have been better if he was a CEO of a bank. For something like this, he should have a last name like Gunrunner, or Defenseman or something.
i still think an auto turret with programmable burst ammo is a much better choice considering a drone swarm can easily overwhelm a system with one laser beam. And a swarm would only need to be 3 or 4 drones attacking from different sides at the same time.
I think a laser system will mainly be implemented on dedicated AA platforms as a secondary weapon, and on other platforms simply as a way to have a form of drone defense like MBTs Also i think it'll be great for defensive positions, no need to supply ammo or complicated logistics, it's cheap, accurate and almost no danger of civilian casualties
I totally agree. A auto cannot with similar aiming technology would probably be more reliable and effective. Lasers could be more effectively countered by using drones by not just by swarming at high speed, but flying in poor weather, and using smoke, reflective materials and automatic evasion when a laser is detected. The laser and large active power pack would give the system a larger signature making itself a larger target that could be more easily tracked and destroyed with other counter measure such as artillery. They may still have a place in a layerd defense system, but I think it's primary benefit is cost saving not effectiveness.
@@nathanwaight It will definetly be interesting to see if all of the countrys watching the Ukrainian war will implement effective systems against such attack methods in the coming years. To this point every theoretical system i have seen can be easily overwhelmed with 3000-5000€ worth of drones (multiple) while western armor costs millions. I have thought of many ways from backpack sized 40mm autonomous launchers for personal anti drone capability for the squad size. To counter loiter drones waiting for FPVs then they intercept them automatically, maybe even from the ground so they start following drones that pass over them then smash into or trigger an explosive near them to just what i said in my comment with the 20-30mm auto cannon. But it all comes down to cost and real combat effectivness
Having worked with large high precision laser microscopes, a huge problem with this is that you need each lens and mirror hidden inside the system to stay in a very fixed position. So it would be very accurate in the lab, but the moment you go over a ditch, or (god forbid) are under fire, you can probably say goodbye to any precision you once had. I wouldnt be surprised if it interlocked completely when that happens. Optical parts are also very expensive, and time consuming to install or adjust. So just having "modular" replacements might not be cost effective.
the weakness of drones are the propellers, high rpm any strong thread will tangle in them readily. Even a little bit of thread tangled on a prop will make the drone steering problems. I would suggest you need a small pistol that shoots out multiple short spools of fishing line or similar, maybe a bit larger ribbon like threads. If the threads can be made to release at a given distance from the shooter it will have a good chance of entangling the blades. Just to clarify: pistol shoots cannistor which contains threads, cannistor opens at preset distance from shooter releasing multiple threads in many directions, giving a curtain of threads to tangle props. You want a thread that readily tangles in the props. Also it should be biodegrabable so it doesn't pollute the environment or tangle in birds legs or other animals. The props are the weakness thats where they should be targeting in simple methods.
How about wing drones with propeller on the back? How about wind that gonna make effective range about 5-10 meters? loitering munition comming to a target with 100-200 kph?
Ever notice how slow lasers in Star Wars are. In one on the Mandalorian episodes the character dodges a stormtroopers laser from 50'. That's 40mph. In the Star Wars universe cruising 80 mph on the highway is like Warp drive.
Bluehalo is a good start and probably better suited to protection of military bases in the US because some properties have an illegal drone problem. A three mile range would provide coverage to a significant portion of a base. In addition, the only collateral damage would be a falling drone and not missile parts or bullets.
A lot of people guessed that lasers would be one of the more economical solutions to dealing with drones. Drones are pretty flimsy to make they light enough to fly long ranges without depleting their energy packs. They're also made from cheap materials such as plastic and even cardboard to make them more difficult to detect. Some of the more expensive autonomous drones are built studier but rely on sensitive optics that the laser has no issue destroying. The only hard part about all of this is detecting the drones.
It can take 15 seconds or more on a moving drone if it can even stay tracking that drone. They are literally a decade or more from making this work and the problem is that if drones are flying over how many can it actually take down. Now imagine the weather is poor like fog or rain and this thing is useless. The higher up or faster moving drones would also be even harder to take out. It sounds great at first until you use it in the real world. This is not the solution and the size of the thing is massive and it's extremely heavy. I would revisit this idea in a decade and see if its feasible then for short range use. I can see these used more on rooftops around important infrastructure. Maybe having dozens of these on rooftops would be a better option
Not really, that way wars will just come down to who can waste the most material. What they actually need to do is make it smaller, more efficient and mass produce it.
@@gags730Make the drone silver with some protection for the optics and it doubtful it could shoot them down at all. Attack the laser vehicle from several direction at once and it would have no chance.
-Fog and dust has entered the chat Lasers need long dwell times, a ton of precision, a lot of maintenance, and are ineffective with any bit of atmospheric interference
I think millions are currently being spent against the houthis in the red sea. They use drones and taking the drones down has been extremely expensive.
One of these has already been spotted in the Kursk Region where an FPV Lancet Strike took it out. It has not been captured however, and appears to be damaged beyond any possible reverse engineering.
The laser is Infrared, which means that smoke (idk about clouds specifically) and a lot of reflective surfaces would not affect it. Remember the selling point here is the cost per engagement not speed or effectiveness.
@@krashd Good point, however the type of smoke that smoke detectors detect differs from the type of smoke you might find in a combat area. Namely the particulate matter that makes up the smoke. Not sure if that would make a difference, but afaik there *are* certain types of smoke at IR can see through. Whether that is near or far IR , or what specific types of smoke, I couldn't say.
15seconds to take one drone down ? It means, that 3 drones assault wing worth of 1k dollar each destroy the laser worth of 10M, crew and armoured car for 3M. But it can be a good business to sell lazors, sounds cool.
She did say it "...can take AS MANY AS 15 seconds". So 15 seconds is the max. I'd imagine smaller cheaper drones (like the ones in Ukraine) can be taken down faster.
They have a fix for it every time. See that hammer? Yeah, 450 dollars, now left handed soldiers can use it too. What until you see how much we just paid for that chair your sitting on.
Just so everyone knows I’ve defeated this system with Nylon ceramic hybrid beads which reflect 73% of energy emitted from this weapon system over 30 min period and it’s both 3d printable and or injection molded drone body’s.
@@victorhopper6774 you are under cover or concealment operating a drone against this system I’m more worried about artillery or small arms fire, don’t worry you’ll grow up some day 😘
I first heard of these a decade ago. The Navy recruiter told me I could work on these lasers so I joined... I did work on AECF advanced electronics, but no mention of these in 2 years of tech/trade school.
It's great of course, but how would it work againt fast FPV drones? What if there are 2-3 drones at the same time from different sides? Laser needs some time to melt the target and in case of real combat with trees and building this time is crusial.
When America perceived the MiG-25 as a significant threat, they developed the F-15. Right now Uncle Sam sees a whole lotta cheap chicom drones as a significant threat to his forces. You can bet the shield American forces bring to their next fight will be more effective than the threat calls for.
@@grahamfloyd3451 They have been working on both offense and defense of drones for more than a decade. Best offensive video for drones - see the Perdix Swarm video published by FUNKER530. Demo was from nearly 10 years ago. At the end of the video - imagine each of those drones carrying a charge of HE.
The Navy already fielded the "LaWS" as it is called over 7 years ago to do the same thing. I guess it was easier for them since ships are huge with big engines and generators and they have more than enough energy to power them but the Army had to wait a little longer for the tech to get cheaper and make it more practical. Anyways, i'm pretty sure they'll start using lasers to shoot down not only enemy drones but also aircraft, missiles, vehicles, ships, etc, in the not very distant future as energy based weapons will eventually replace projectile based ones as technology advances. And since light travels at 186, 282 mps (miles per second), no man-made misslie, drone or jet can possibly fly fast enough to evade them. So, shield technology will have to be developed to counter them. And so begins Star Wars. 😊
The lack of range is just an immature initial design in my opinion. They are probably doing either dichroic or spectral combination and they need to ensure their beam paths are overlapping perfectly. In addition they need to ensure their focusing mechanism is able to set the focus point on a target that far. I think the reason they are taking so long to down a drone at range is because they are focusing on a point closer to the system than the drone is and the beam is diffusing out.
This isn’t true. In Ukraine, hundreds of drones are being deployed each day to attempt to cheaply take out targets. Artillery fire is expensive and it’s worth wasting on a single unit. The point of this system is to counter that.
@@Cabalero24 Really? So they can't move fast enough to track a target? Even the 45mph (20 m/s) one shown in the video? Ever watch laser light shows and notice how fast those react? There are videos posted by the military showing rockets in flight being tracked and fried by lasers. Yeah, pokey little UAVs would be no problem.
@@bigdog8008 отложи эмоции, читай внимательно, понимай правильно. 1.лазер - большая медленная лёгкая мишень. и дорогая. 2.неважно как быстро стреляет лазер, бпла победят численным превосходством. молниеносная атака большим числом с нескольких направлений. 3.бпла дешёвые, они уже изменили ход боевых действий. 4.лазер имеет большое количество ограничений: ему нужно большое электроснабжение, его долго доставлять на позицию, лазер легко обойти, у лазера ограниченная дальность, у лазера ограниченное количество целей и углов атаки, лазер не всепогодный и так далее.. сегодня лазер - просто пылесос для военного бюджета.
это способ требовать безотлагательное финансирование, если нет угрозы - её придумают, они готовы обвинить китайский метеозонд что это он убил кеннеди, проблема государственного управления в том что система ущербна, сегодня чем больше ты тратишь - тем ты более важный начальник, это вынуждает швыряться деньгами, подрядчики которые занимаются ерундой дают самые большие взятки.
Because they don't have these stationed at the military bases - yet. I imagine they have already thought about this being a good test scenario and have considered this as well.
China is actually ahead of US on laser weapon system, their LW-30 and OW5-A50 laser weapon system have 30kW and 50-100kW power output compare to LOCUST 2-20 kW, not to mention they are making them at 1/3 of price as US did
The moment she said: "...operates like video game..." and "controls are like those of Call of Duty..." I could not resist the temptation to go read all the comments...oh this is gonna take time! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
No material is 100% reflective. Against a power laser enough will leak through to burn it out at an increasingly rapid rate, with the imperfections failing first as hotspots. A drone can't carry something like a heavy mirrored plate which would take substantial heat to burn through. It would be more like a foil. Might buy some time though.
Dkngyen Is right in addition different frequencies of lasers cut different things. What we experience from low powered lasers is very different to what powerful lasers do. A normal fiber laser can cut through various metals and plastics but won't cut through wood easily. This is the reason for several frequencies from this device. It allows for more material crossover. Mirrors also can't handle heat. These lasers essentially would shatter a mirror faster than our eyes could process the information.
@@torginus That's a frequency issue for the wavelength of the laser if it can't cut/burn through. This video shows they have multiple fiber lasers on different wavelengths for this device. A blueberry pie might block a few frequencies, not all of them, so I kinda doubt it was this system. You can't look at this as a one example = proof of absolute flaw. These are extremely powerful lasers, and they are capable of vaporizing most if not all materials given enough time. Now are they perfectly ready for the battlefield? In some cases yes in some no. 10 Years from now I imagine they will be everywhere with military powers.
Yes it will be if it's used to save American and American allies' soldier lives. America spends a lot of money for protecting our troops, just watch a video called Incoming, incoming, incoming. Each one of those explosions cost 46 dollars a round, if they fire for a second it cost about $3500. Also these drones cost about 500 dollars each, and hopefully these can take down the larger ones too which cost $10,000's of dollars. Also they wouldn't be put every mile, that wouldn't make sense logistically.
Deadly Hezbollah strike shows growing threat posed by drones: on.wsj.com/404N29T
🤗 dobre 👌
ok and what about the magnetic field renegade drone that ive been thinking about sense i was 2
drone hacks brain uses it as storage hides in some persons house
i see why they dont want scholars where government still doesnt understand
but umm whos stopping me from coping the information you want secret
"Operated with an Xbox controller"
Shows a gimped Dualshock 2.
It can be operated with both.
Can't blame em, those are the two greatest controllers of all time... Lol Gamecube controller a close 3rd.
I came here for this comment.
To those of us that don’t play video games, ie most people, they are the same thing.
They could have said "Nintendo controller." lol. Same thing to a lot of people.
Moneymaker is a fine name for a defense contractor ceo to a defense department that has never passed an audit.
@@haoguo2056 You could probably never pass an audit either. You keep all the receipts to things you buy?
@@RandyRanderson404 youre defending them thats crazy
@@volcansv9395 Everyone says it like they’re so smart but it just shows how people don’t understand how audits work.
With that big used car sells men smile
And they never will pass a audit, it's the military.
That's the most baller surname i've ever seen "Moneymaker"
Later married to Moneypenny.
Arguably the most fitting name for a CEO, straight to the point 😹😹
Not the real moneymaker (reference to history matters RUclips channel)
I have a friend with that name. It's a translation of the original German name that meant coin minting from when they first immigrated to US.
well why not, shoemaker's already famous
This man has the most “Military Industrial complex” last name ever! I bet his best bud is called “John Lobbyist” 😅
For real, *MONEYMAKER* should be an illegal last name. :P
The guy who won WOC Poker 2003 tournament was named Chris Moneymaker lol he won $2m at first place with 55% stake.
Lolll 😂😂
Can’t believe this guy is named Johnny Moneymaker. One of the best names I’ve ever seen.
That is a Final Boss name. They probably edited out the scene with his corporate legal counsel Mr Slicktalk McLiar and his head accountant Mr Beancounter.
almost seams to silly to be real dont it?
You really think someone in that business goes by their own name?
Hideo Kojima would feel so vindicated.
@@dewaard3301 yeah because you cant figure who this guy out based on his face or something
Comments:
10% about the video
90% about the guy’s name
logical, since the content of the video could be rendered useless with a mirror
actually there are 1% of comments about comment
Perfectly balanced, as all things should be
@@soulei1990actually if I’m correct these laser could burn throw the mirror so yeah.
@@soulei1990 Mirrors work on low powered visible light spectrum lasers. These are lasers that go very far beyond that. Mirrors do not work on lasers like this.
Jonathan Moneymaker surely knows how to make money 😂😂😂😂😂
I'm glad my tax money is going to this. Research and development is expensive.
@@TheWorldsOkayestUSMarineyour tax dollars probably payed for one rocket that blew up already somewhere
@@TheWorldsOkayestUSMarine boy are you naive lol, look up how many billions were wasted on wonder weapons that never made it lol
They are interviewing a SALESMAN who is trying to sell the weapon. Let's not lose sight of that.
проблема государственного управления в том что система ущербна:
сегодня чем больше ты тратишь - тем ты более важный начальник, это вынуждает швыряться деньгами,
подрядчики которые занимаются ерундой дают самые большие взятки.
That's NOT how DEFENCE SALES work. Civilians can't buy this, only certain government agencies could. AND those government agencies most certainly 100% DO NOT shop for defence products on YT.
If a government agency had a requirement for a laser based anti drone system they would put out a tender for contract or they would contact the company and get the classified specs and the real salesmen, which is likely many people and a protracted process.
They're CERTAINLY NOT looking to buy high end military kit on YT lol... especially not a WSJ video.
@@homebase5934 Consumers can’t buy prescription meds without a doctor prescribing them. Yet…
You weren’t rude, so I won’t be either. Just ask yourself why an officer of this company would do an interview and provide WSJ video of their system in operation.
You mean Moneymaker
Unfortunately that's the way capitalism works, decisions made by people who don't use the product based upon information from sales people who did not design it and don't use it.
A drone is not a low-tech weapon. It's a relatively inexpensive high-tech weapon.
A drone does not require a high degree of technology.
Hurry up and release a mini version to combat mosquitoes already so I won't have to wear full armor when going outside to do gardening. Lol
Try mosquito repellant sounds. You can literally play a youtube video with one.
There are also repellant lights for the night time
@@NJ-wb1cz That's going to work great on insects that are deaf. Not to mention YT audio codecs are meant for people. Those lights don't really work either. You need chemicals for camouflage, also poison.
@@ronnetgrazer362 works for me
@@ronnetgrazer362 works for me, sound like skill issue
@@NJ-wb1cz Even the mosquitos won't touch you. How sad.
2 mile of range, 15 seconds to destroy a target, unless it can lock and shot while moving, it can be easily overwhelmed by 16 drones traveling at 30mph.
15 seconds is only at 2 miles, which is close to the maximum effective range. As the targets get closer, the beam becomes more potent. At close range, the beam could destroy a target in just a few seconds.
@@dwaneanderson8039 laser beam does not diverge that much. Inverse square law does not apply here. Normal atmosphere is also transparent enough. The targeting can get easier for closer drones for sure but I’ve already generously assumed zero targeting time in the calculation.
I wonder what the impact on dwell time would be if the adversary uses a low-tech approach like painting vulnerable surfaces of the drone with a reflective material. Moreover, can this thing even perform rapidly successive interceptions, or does it need time to recharge its battery/capacitors from the Stryker's alternator?
@@darkphoton_15keV OK but lasers do atten greatly in the lower atmosphere. A few dB/km isn't unheard of.
@@NoneOfYourBeesWax1 Yes, but 2 mile is way too close. My guess for the 2 mile limit is more likely to be from the targeting system. I am surprised that they demonstrated visual targeting manually using a controller and somehow phrased it as a selling point. I expected fully automatic target detection with visual and laser/radar of some kind as input and advanced machine learning to recognize and mark the potential targets. The only human input should be confirming or picking the target candidates to shot.
John Moneymaker... CEO of a defense company.....total badass.
Naa, it would have been better if he was a CEO of a bank. For something like this, he should have a last name like Gunrunner, or Defenseman or something.
That cool and all, but what about "Sharks with Lazers!" XD
Reminds me of the Avenger weapon system from Command and Conquer Generals.
This Moneymaker dude just made it a reality.
Actually they forgot to tell you that on low power mode it can also whiten your teeth, saving on soldiers’ dental bills.
The fact that it doesn't make a BWAHHHH sound when firing is a missed opportunity
Or a long and loud "PEEEWWWW!!!"
Ya I will miss that part
i still think an auto turret with programmable burst ammo is a much better choice considering a drone swarm can easily overwhelm a system with one laser beam. And a swarm would only need to be 3 or 4 drones attacking from different sides at the same time.
That is on the Stryker. There is a laser, a Bushmaster, a coaxial M240 and stinger missiles
I think a laser system will mainly be implemented on dedicated AA platforms as a secondary weapon, and on other platforms simply as a way to have a form of drone defense like MBTs
Also i think it'll be great for defensive positions, no need to supply ammo or complicated logistics, it's cheap, accurate and almost no danger of civilian casualties
I totally agree. A auto cannot with similar aiming technology would probably be more reliable and effective. Lasers could be more effectively countered by using drones by not just by swarming at high speed, but flying in poor weather, and using smoke, reflective materials and automatic evasion when a laser is detected. The laser and large active power pack would give the system a larger signature making itself a larger target that could be more easily tracked and destroyed with other counter measure such as artillery. They may still have a place in a layerd defense system, but I think it's primary benefit is cost saving not effectiveness.
@@nathanwaight It will definetly be interesting to see if all of the countrys watching the Ukrainian war will implement effective systems against such attack methods in the coming years. To this point every theoretical system i have seen can be easily overwhelmed with 3000-5000€ worth of drones (multiple) while western armor costs millions. I have thought of many ways from backpack sized 40mm autonomous launchers for personal anti drone capability for the squad size. To counter loiter drones waiting for FPVs then they intercept them automatically, maybe even from the ground so they start following drones that pass over them then smash into or trigger an explosive near them to just what i said in my comment with the 20-30mm auto cannon. But it all comes down to cost and real combat effectivness
I was thinking that they could just use a giant laser disco ball for those swarms haha 😂
Mr. Moneymaker, when is the last time you’ve shaken that thing. To be clear, when is the last time you’ve shaken your moneymaker?
the last time the senate had a trillion dollar contract and wanted to give away some taxpayer money inn foreign wars.
He does it at every pitch meeting.
⏸️
Having worked with large high precision laser microscopes, a huge problem with this is that you need each lens and mirror hidden inside the system to stay in a very fixed position. So it would be very accurate in the lab, but the moment you go over a ditch, or (god forbid) are under fire, you can probably say goodbye to any precision you once had. I wouldnt be surprised if it interlocked completely when that happens.
Optical parts are also very expensive, and time consuming to install or adjust. So just having "modular" replacements might not be cost effective.
%100 trustworthy and reliable coming from a guy with a last Moneymaker
the weakness of drones are the propellers, high rpm any strong thread will tangle in them readily. Even a little bit of thread tangled on a prop will make the drone steering problems.
I would suggest you need a small pistol that shoots out multiple short spools of fishing line or similar, maybe a bit larger ribbon like threads. If the threads can be made to release at a given distance from the shooter it will have a good chance of entangling the blades.
Just to clarify: pistol shoots cannistor which contains threads, cannistor opens at preset distance from shooter releasing multiple threads in many directions, giving a curtain of threads to tangle props. You want a thread that readily tangles in the props.
Also it should be biodegrabable so it doesn't pollute the environment or tangle in birds legs or other animals.
The props are the weakness thats where they should be targeting in simple methods.
silly string
@@AD-vw8xu yes something along those lines
How about wing drones with propeller on the back? How about wind that gonna make effective range about 5-10 meters? loitering munition comming to a target with 100-200 kph?
@@Димадулевич short threads but many, only need one thread to tangle propellor
Cant wait for a drone with a mirror😂
@sgtbrown4273 blocking by a diffuse, light-weight ceramic absorber is all it takes.
@sgtbrown4273 "3kW" doesn't mean anything useful until you understand the other parameters of both the laser output and the laser-target interaction.
Nerd fight!!!
Doesn't convince me at all.
10 million to fry 1 drone. But then the second drone attacks the laser and destroys it with a 40$ grenade
It's 3$ for 1 drone...
An ablative rubberized coating on larger military drones makes a good defense against laser energy.
Blyat
Just attach mirrors to drones
True, but extra weight is a disadvantage. Even conventional paint can be significant, armor even more so.
@@randyfontenot2939 wrapping the drone in tinfoil helps get an even char while maintaining moisture and flavor
The gallatic empire will be definitely anxious to this invention.
Ever notice how slow lasers in Star Wars are. In one on the Mandalorian episodes the character dodges a stormtroopers laser from 50'. That's 40mph. In the Star Wars universe cruising 80 mph on the highway is like Warp drive.
Bluehalo is a good start and probably better suited to protection of military bases in the US because some properties have an illegal drone problem. A three mile range would provide coverage to a significant portion of a base. In addition, the only collateral damage would be a falling drone and not missile parts or bullets.
If used in a war zone, there will probably be a lot of unexploded ordinance attached to the downed drones.
Yeah, these would be much better suited on stationary structures.
Impressive tech, curious about its broader implications! 💭
A lot of people guessed that lasers would be one of the more economical solutions to dealing with drones. Drones are pretty flimsy to make they light enough to fly long ranges without depleting their energy packs. They're also made from cheap materials such as plastic and even cardboard to make them more difficult to detect. Some of the more expensive autonomous drones are built studier but rely on sensitive optics that the laser has no issue destroying. The only hard part about all of this is detecting the drones.
They need 2000 dollar Drones to defeat the enemy 2000 dollar drones. The 10 million dollar box would be a top target itself.
you cannot steal as much money from cheap items
It can take 15 seconds or more on a moving drone if it can even stay tracking that drone. They are literally a decade or more from making this work and the problem is that if drones are flying over how many can it actually take down. Now imagine the weather is poor like fog or rain and this thing is useless. The higher up or faster moving drones would also be even harder to take out. It sounds great at first until you use it in the real world. This is not the solution and the size of the thing is massive and it's extremely heavy. I would revisit this idea in a decade and see if its feasible then for short range use. I can see these used more on rooftops around important infrastructure. Maybe having dozens of these on rooftops would be a better option
Not really, that way wars will just come down to who can waste the most material.
What they actually need to do is make it smaller, more efficient and mass produce it.
Yahh this would be useless in Ukraine at this point. R/d makes sense.
@@gags730Make the drone silver with some protection for the optics and it doubtful it could shoot them down at all. Attack the laser vehicle from several direction at once and it would have no chance.
“FRIGGIN LASER BEAMS MAN!”
😂His last name 🤑🤑🤑
Moneymaker I hope that's what you are talking about
literally "Moneymaker"
well he's moneymaking right now
His name in Mandarin: Cha Ching
@@Refuse2Lose33 bro you won the comment section
The name of the CEO is pure gold!!! 😁
Gold is as good as monney. LOL
Puregold would be a hella last name for a banker.
Johnny #5 I AM ALIVE! One of my favorite movies growing up. That’s what the turret of this thing reminds me of 🤣
This reminds me of that GTA San Andreas mission Air Raid where you had to shoot down drones from a roof lol
They used to Call the Wildfires in USA CONSPIRACY THEORY when people said the government had Lasers!!!! 😂
The government has had lasers since the 50s. But it still doesnt mean the wildfires were caused by them.
-Fog and dust has entered the chat
Lasers need long dwell times, a ton of precision, a lot of maintenance, and are ineffective with any bit of atmospheric interference
Yeah, dust on the lens of a high power laser is a huge no-no...
@@Hexanitrobenzene Agreed, some FOD or dust on it will get it burned right up, at a minimum the coating on the lens will burn off.
short depth of field is problem. The large apertures allow lower power density at the source.
If it's just fog, they can do with multiple frequency and spectrum. Dust is kinda harder to get through.
new jersey needs you
It’s only a matter of time that range will increase.
They just need to wait for drone to stop screwing around and stay still for like 15 sec.
3$ dollar beams but US army contractors would price the whole thing x300 times its price 😂😂
Oh easily 😂
Exactly. But if it's really $3 or even $6, then it's truly effective.
Still cheaper than AA missile
@@SapphiR3_ Acceptance to corruption and theft is a bigger threat than all the enemy's the United States has Worldwide.
Still better than a 2000$ missile marked up 300x
Deploy to NJ maybe?
Meh too easy
Meanwhile in New Jersey we send our drones on Beer Runs.
I need a sitrep solder ASAP! "They're using mirrors sir, effing mirrors we're like self-frying turkeys out here sir!".
3:00 No one has ever fired a 3m$ patriot pac 3 at a dji drone.
I think millions are currently being spent against the houthis in the red sea. They use drones and taking the drones down has been extremely expensive.
the USA navy did when we tried to prevent the houthis from blocking hormuz
@@davidanalyst671 Yeah sure, the Houthis blocked the gulf of aden with a dji drone. The Houthis have actual anti-ship missles from Iran.
@@davidanalyst671 How to tell us you have no clue where the Strait of Hormuz is without telling us.
@@davidanalyst671
That was the strait to the red sea mate. But yeah Americans never know their topography. By design easier to sell lies that way.
Wait till military drone companies make drones with advance metallurgy which are more resistant to heat.
Nah just send many more cheap drones to overwhelm the defenses.
Kinda looks like Johnny 5.
One of these has already been spotted in the Kursk Region where an FPV Lancet Strike took it out. It has not been captured however, and appears to be damaged beyond any possible reverse engineering.
5:46 this one looks like a caterpillar diesel generator that someone attached a laser to lol
clouds, smoke, reflective surface on the drone... many issues that make lasers marginally effective
Reflective surfaces aren't as effective as you would think.
The laser is Infrared, which means that smoke (idk about clouds specifically) and a lot of reflective surfaces would not affect it.
Remember the selling point here is the cost per engagement not speed or effectiveness.
this isn't about making something effective, it's about selling a product.
@@ParoXyzmm Smoke would most definitely affect it since modern optical smoke detectors rely on smoke scattering an IR beam.
@@krashd Good point, however the type of smoke that smoke detectors detect differs from the type of smoke you might find in a combat area. Namely the particulate matter that makes up the smoke. Not sure if that would make a difference, but afaik there *are* certain types of smoke at IR can see through. Whether that is near or far IR , or what specific types of smoke, I couldn't say.
Bro, there is no way that guy's laat name is unintentional. Either he changed it or he was born for this role 😅
15seconds to take one drone down ? It means, that 3 drones assault wing worth of 1k dollar each destroy the laser worth of 10M, crew and armoured car for 3M. But it can be a good business to sell lazors, sounds cool.
She did say it "...can take AS MANY AS 15 seconds". So 15 seconds is the max. I'd imagine smaller cheaper drones (like the ones in Ukraine) can be taken down faster.
@@von_max they aren't even using beam protection on their target. Glue some foil on it or paint it with mirror paint - bam, 90% is reflected
@@NJ-wb1cz i guess it depends how strong their laser is. Maybe that remaining 10% is enough to heat up that foil enough to mess up a cheap drone.
Donate 10 billion to isrl cause ben said so
@@von_max Yeah those small cheap drones will drop in 1 second of laser.
Learning from other wars is a key for development
Apparently we need those at each military installation. UFO drones were camping out for weeks overhead recently.
Inexpensive is a word the military-industrial complex hates...🚩🚩🚩
They have a fix for it every time. See that hammer? Yeah, 450 dollars, now left handed soldiers can use it too. What until you see how much we just paid for that chair your sitting on.
Yeah... the $10mil price tag and the maintenance of the system alone definitely make up for the cheap ammunition.
Don't worry, this is plenty not inexpensive.
система государственного воровства построена на том что чем больше ты тратишь денег - тем важнее твоя должность, это вынуждает швыряться деньгами.
when your solution is a million dollar laser turret apparently thats actually lucrative
Not surprised they usually demonstrate in semi-arid environment, not somewhere foggy and raining.
Just so everyone knows I’ve defeated this system with Nylon ceramic hybrid beads which reflect 73% of energy emitted from this weapon system over 30 min period and it’s both 3d printable and or injection molded drone body’s.
nice
ok except it would still work on you. did you miss that part
Sure ya did, buddy. Suuuure. 😂
@@victorhopper6774 you are under cover or concealment operating a drone against this system I’m more worried about artillery or small arms fire, don’t worry you’ll grow up some day 😘
I first heard of these a decade ago. The Navy recruiter told me I could work on these lasers so I joined... I did work on AECF advanced electronics, but no mention of these in 2 years of tech/trade school.
Jonathan Moneymaker, what a name!
$10M to build one. About 10 drones - acting as a teem - are needed to reach it. Each drone is about $100 ~ $500. Do the math.
Prepare your defenses accordingly.
Right. So remove the laser entirely and let them destroy the undefended $10M armored vehicle instead. What's your point.
It's great of course, but how would it work againt fast FPV drones? What if there are 2-3 drones at the same time from different sides? Laser needs some time to melt the target and in case of real combat with trees and building this time is crusial.
True. That is why I think High Power Microwave weapons have a lot more potential than lasers.
When America perceived the MiG-25 as a significant threat, they developed the F-15. Right now Uncle Sam sees a whole lotta cheap chicom drones as a significant threat to his forces. You can bet the shield American forces bring to their next fight will be more effective than the threat calls for.
I'm not taking that bet, respectfully.
@@grahamfloyd3451 They have been working on both offense and defense of drones for more than a decade. Best offensive video for drones - see the Perdix Swarm video published by FUNKER530. Demo was from nearly 10 years ago. At the end of the video - imagine each of those drones carrying a charge of HE.
@@grahamfloyd3451 I would 100 times over. We ain't Russia, we spend a lot of money on protecting our men.
The Navy already fielded the "LaWS" as it is called over 7 years ago to do the same thing. I guess it was easier for them since ships are huge with big engines and generators and they have more than enough energy to power them but the Army had to wait a little longer for the tech to get cheaper and make it more practical. Anyways, i'm pretty sure they'll start using lasers to shoot down not only enemy drones but also aircraft, missiles, vehicles, ships, etc, in the not very distant future as energy based weapons will eventually replace projectile based ones as technology advances. And since light travels at 186, 282 mps (miles per second), no man-made misslie, drone or jet can possibly fly fast enough to evade them. So, shield technology will have to be developed to counter them. And so begins Star Wars. 😊
2 problems as an engineer, lack of range and dust. This technology just isn't ready yet.
The lack of range is just an immature initial design in my opinion. They are probably doing either dichroic or spectral combination and they need to ensure their beam paths are overlapping perfectly. In addition they need to ensure their focusing mechanism is able to set the focus point on a target that far.
I think the reason they are taking so long to down a drone at range is because they are focusing on a point closer to the system than the drone is and the beam is diffusing out.
If you spot a single drone, you're most likely already under heavy artillery fire.
This isn’t true. In Ukraine, hundreds of drones are being deployed each day to attempt to cheaply take out targets. Artillery fire is expensive and it’s worth wasting on a single unit. The point of this system is to counter that.
+1
@@koalaunknown
лазер - это большая малоподвижная мишень.
против бпла у лазера нет шансов, пустая трата денег.
@@Cabalero24 Really? So they can't move fast enough to track a target? Even the 45mph (20 m/s) one shown in the video?
Ever watch laser light shows and notice how fast those react? There are videos posted by the military showing rockets in flight being tracked and fried by lasers. Yeah, pokey little UAVs would be no problem.
@@bigdog8008
отложи эмоции, читай внимательно, понимай правильно.
1.лазер - большая медленная лёгкая мишень. и дорогая.
2.неважно как быстро стреляет лазер, бпла победят численным превосходством. молниеносная атака большим числом с нескольких направлений.
3.бпла дешёвые, они уже изменили ход боевых действий.
4.лазер имеет большое количество ограничений: ему нужно большое электроснабжение, его долго доставлять на позицию, лазер легко обойти, у лазера ограниченная дальность, у лазера ограниченное количество целей и углов атаки, лазер не всепогодный и так далее.. сегодня лазер - просто пылесос для военного бюджета.
Double the power to $6. You’re welcome.
Opened comments as soon as I saw he's name😂😂😂😂
Nice to see that my research is being used. The Us military bought it years ago from the company I worked for.
I started working with lasers 30yrs ago. Its amazing what they can do.
Then why did they let those unknown drones fly over a US military base for 17 days recently?😅
это способ требовать безотлагательное финансирование,
если нет угрозы - её придумают, они готовы обвинить китайский метеозонд что это он убил кеннеди,
проблема государственного управления в том что система ущербна, сегодня чем больше ты тратишь - тем ты более важный начальник, это вынуждает швыряться деньгами, подрядчики которые занимаются ерундой дают самые большие взятки.
Time is needed to position sensors and learn all about the drones and how they communicate.
Because they don't have these stationed at the military bases - yet.
I imagine they have already thought about this being a good test scenario and have considered this as well.
5:50 🫣 nice to know that even high level productions struggle with audio matching when the script gets changed.
that is not an xbox controller
Yep. Journalist mode levels of understanding.
@sgtbrown4273 Sony
China: copy that down, copy that doen!
My indian bramos missile is a cheaper and inferior version of russian p-800 oniks.
They have plenty of Engineers working on US, they also have American private companies who sell their patents, not really a hard thing to do.
China has these long time back, search for silent hunter
China is actually ahead of US on laser weapon system, their LW-30 and OW5-A50 laser weapon system have 30kW and 50-100kW power output compare to LOCUST 2-20 kW, not to mention they are making them at 1/3 of price as US did
@@jamesturner4260 US Navy HELIUS laser is 300 kilowatt
The moment she said: "...operates like video game..." and "controls are like those of Call of Duty..." I could not resist the temptation to go read all the comments...oh this is gonna take time! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Excellent. Good idea.
You just make your drones out of mirrors reflect the laser's,,,,, laser is defeated 😂😂😂
reflects the beam but not the heat from contact. goof effort tho.
Thats not an Xbox controller fake news.
They said it CAN be controlled by an Xbox controller not that it actually is controlled by one
@@galactic-guy the exact wording of the reporter was "and that its operated with an Xbox controller." So OP is correct.
man with a mirror: im about to end the weapon systems whole career
This is why I love this country so much
Yes, the desert perfectly mimics the winter weather in Eastern Europe.
Wont reflective material just defeat the system?
No material is 100% reflective. Against a power laser enough will leak through to burn it out at an increasingly rapid rate, with the imperfections failing first as hotspots. A drone can't carry something like a heavy mirrored plate which would take substantial heat to burn through. It would be more like a foil. Might buy some time though.
Dkngyen Is right in addition different frequencies of lasers cut different things. What we experience from low powered lasers is very different to what powerful lasers do. A normal fiber laser can cut through various metals and plastics but won't cut through wood easily. This is the reason for several frequencies from this device. It allows for more material crossover. Mirrors also can't handle heat. These lasers essentially would shatter a mirror faster than our eyes could process the information.
Yes it will. There was a demonstration where they strapped a blueberry pie to the bottom of the drone, and the laser couldn't burn through it.
@@torginus That's a frequency issue for the wavelength of the laser if it can't cut/burn through. This video shows they have multiple fiber lasers on different wavelengths for this device. A blueberry pie might block a few frequencies, not all of them, so I kinda doubt it was this system.
You can't look at this as a one example = proof of absolute flaw. These are extremely powerful lasers, and they are capable of vaporizing most if not all materials given enough time. Now are they perfectly ready for the battlefield? In some cases yes in some no. 10 Years from now I imagine they will be everywhere with military powers.
@@torginus There have been many videos published showing that reflective surfaces have very little effect on the laser.
Thanks for deleting comments.
NO SUBSCRIPTION.
I did NOT subscribe for this exact reason! 😮
$10M capable of only shooting $100 drone... and you need one every mile.
Money well spent !?!?!?
Yeah and then such a tank gets taken down by a long-range missile, what a misery.
Yes it will be if it's used to save American and American allies' soldier lives. America spends a lot of money for protecting our troops, just watch a video called Incoming, incoming, incoming. Each one of those explosions cost 46 dollars a round, if they fire for a second it cost about $3500. Also these drones cost about 500 dollars each, and hopefully these can take down the larger ones too which cost $10,000's of dollars. Also they wouldn't be put every mile, that wouldn't make sense logistically.
Bullet cost 12 cents, armor costs $500. Just be a man and grit teeth. Can't let 12 cents end you. RIGHT??
@@LolUGotBusted Where the **** can I buy a cartridge for $.12!?
(Standing by with my credit card mate!)
@@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking military price. Units have a budget and bullets have a price tag
The process of development continues.
Three Dollar Beam Y'all was Limp's best album.
using a laser is so old school, radio waves is the way to go.
We need thousands of these
This seems very inefficient. But drone combat is so new, people are still exploring the possibilities.
"moving at 50 miles an hour" *continues to show drone hovering in spot*
"light particles"
"photon"
Oh boy here we go.
Drones verus Lasers! will make a great movie!
I guess it's too heavy to move to New Jersey????
Wuaaallleeeeee.
...Number 5...is alive ?!?!!!!
Now that’s a starship troopers bug zapper
Absolutely crazy that the CEO for a defense tech company has a last name that is literally just "Moneymaker"
Gotta get StyroPyro in on this program. That guys been building crazy lasers for years now
Cool, can I see it work on a very rainy day?
Mirrored/chrome drones with rounded edges. Would like to see the test on that.
Perfect example of Prism Tank.
We should start using them here in the US to protect our own bases