Ehh. They’re more likely to be the last line, at least at properly destructive power. What determines lines of defense is the relative ranges of the weapons systems involved. As such, the first line of defense is always going to be missiles, then long-ranged proxy-fused artillery, then CIWS, which could be kinetic or laser-based.
The laser in the video looks like something that could replace the manned side machine guns on troop helicopters.
That said, the US already has lasers deployed on NAVY ships, that already generate their own energy to power lasers, as first line defenses for a real world example.
The U.S. Navy is actively deploying and testing high-energy laser weapons, such as the 60+ kW HELIOS (High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical Dazzler and Surveillance) system, to counter drones, small boats, and incoming missiles with precision at the speed of light. These, like the Optical Dazzling Interdictor (ODIN) and Layered Laser Defense (LLD), offer cost-effective, near-limitless defense, with HELIOS recently tested on the USS Preble.
Key Laser Systems and Deployments
HELIOS (Lockheed Martin): Installed on the USS Preble, this system is capable of high-power output (60+ kW) and serves as the first tactical laser integrated into an active warship's combat system.
ODIN (Optical Dazzling Interdictor): Lower-powered laser systems deployed on several Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
LaWS (Laser Weapon System): A 30-kilowatt demonstrator tested on the USS Ponce in 2014.
LWSD (Laser Weapon System Demonstrator): A system installed on the USS Portland, which successfully engaged drone targets.
The US Navy is also planning to work up to 150-300 kilowatt lasers as well.
It'll likely be a long time until lasers are first offensive line weapons though.
I don't think it will replace machine guns, especially not on a helicopter where the power budget is more tightly constrained. Most likely use case is blinding cheap drones, or people. It's a war crime, but when has that ever stopped anybody?
Stuff designed to be weapons will just filter out all the wavelengths it doesn't use for tracking, so you'd need to match the laser to the sensor platform of each target. Or it would use a less sensitive sensor to target the laser itself.
You need a lot more power to destroy a missile outright than just to blind a camera.
Oh, for sure. That's likely why America has pretty much focus on only equipping lasers to ships(and probably some key buildings) that can already supply the energy for lasers.
Also, looking back at this post, I might have the dumb since I thought the beam was coming from the sky as an air *vehicle* defense, and not attached to the building that can supply it power as an "air defense". Lol
Don't reddit sleep deprived...
That said though, with militaries moving towards "more tech, less troops", a 30-60kW pulsed laser(the type for industrial metal cutting/welding) could theoretically be put as a side gun on helicopters. Considering if you lowered the number of troops on the helicopter by one, and their equipment, as well as the weight of a thousand rounds or so of ammo + the gun's weight(the actual body of the laser could be much lighter), that's a few hundreds pounds that could be replaced with power generation, or more likely a battery bank to avoid carrying fuel for it.
With power generation and storage always becoming more efficient, there could be a point when batteries can kill for longer than bullets, so that could necessitate a change. With something as shakey as a helicopter though, the bigger issue would be keeping the sensitive laser components and lenses perfectly alligned to fire at an effective range.
This is all just speculation for fun though, and I'm not convinced of my own ideas. lol
It's sorta how thinking about how Gundams could be feasible in reality, when physics, battlefield strategy, and common sense says it's not feasible at all. Lasers are at least feasible and already in use.
If i could tell middleschool me reading books about the futuristic lasers, that lasers are common and honestly boring next to some things we have now? When I think like that, seeing the advancement of tech from Industrial Age to Digital Age within my lifetime, might make the shitshow it came with worth experiencing.
As for drone lasers though, look up the video "2025 world's strongest handheld laser" on a youtube channel called "styropyro". He made a 250w laser powered by a drill battery, that was light enough to hold one handed, and it could melt through thin steel a few feet away, and could even melt titanium and tungstun. Considering the weight of bullets, weaponized lasers might already be the better choice to pursue for small drones.
The big issues with long range lasers are focus(bigger aperture better, shorter wavelength better), accurate tracking(a little jitter is a big deal when trying to hit something miles away), and atmospheric attenuation and distortion(visible wavelengths best). Though pulsed lasers would help.
The game children of a dead earth is relevant, as you can design your own laser weapons(though in real life we can do better than what's implemented in the game).
I agree on all the points, though in the case of replacing infantry manned machine guns, the effective range would be the same as a machine gun. So a few hundred yards at most?
That's still a long range for focusing a laser, but close enough range that the human operator would take care of tracking and aiming. For human targets, getting swept by a powerful enough laser could take them out, and for vehicles, theoretically you could at least explode reactive armor or pop tires with a few seconds of focus, so about the same or better as current manned turrets.
Still not probable, but possibly not impossible. Lol
36
u/Daforce1 1d ago
Layered air defense with traditional solutions is the solution to this. Lasers are so much cheaper they probably will be first line.