[Isto]

Not sure is it appropriate to comment on this thread on this subject. But somehow i see Energy Weapons, especially Laser weapons of something that might not stand the test of time. There might be a timeframe they excell, but that timeframe might stay short as others adapt to their use.

It can be as easy, than just coat the missile with a material, that either absorbs or mirrors the beam away in some way.

For example, if you shoot Laser beam to mirror, what happens ?


So the production of Laser Weapons, can be very expensive and time consuming. When the counter can be very cheap, easy and simple. So in the end, can very much be, that it is not worth it.

But the Air Burst munition for example, that use kinetic projectiles that can track the missile and change direction in the air, exploding to hundreds of pellets before hitting the target, even one pellet enough to possible neutralize the target. Can be shot on rapid fire rates like 300 rounds per minute on 40-50mm platform and something like 120 rounds a minute with 76mm platform, and 90 rounds a minute with 127mm platform or the likes. Which can become the Mainstay for any Infantry Fighting Vehicle (An Airburst fully automated CIWS turret that tracks and destroys missiles, drones, loitering munitions automatically offering close range air defence to troops, artillery, supply and so).

The smaller calibers can even be installed to a tank. For example, a future thank contains 2 x 25mm CIWS turrets with AirBurst munition in both sides of turret. And for why not, also can transport infantry similar than IFV (like Merkava can) and function as Artillery shooting guided munitions.

No matter what kind of missiles, drones or loitering munitions you develop in the future, the AirBurst munition is always relevant against them because it uses Kinetic Energy to destroy the target.

This is the route Italy Army have chosen. They go the Autocannon route, and are heavily invested in AirBurst type of munitions. You can see this in their Navy too. When others install few turrets in their Ships, Italy instals 4 in each ship (3 in front, and one in back so, that at certain angle, they can all fire at same direction). The largest of these can be used to shoot guided munitions further away than 120 kilometers. So especially in that Mediterranean area, those turrets have a high threat range to ships too, can be used to Shore Bombardment instead of missiles, and can be used to effectically neutralize any missile Threats to the ships. The munition is also way cheaper to produce than missiles, and you can take more of them on the ship than missiles. Lets say opposing ship have 80 missiles, they can very well have 8 000 munitions available against them and they are effective on neutralizing any missile threats, as they track the missile, and change course in the air, exploding on front of target to smaller pellets on rapid fire rate. It is a new development, the AirBurst (OTO Melara) and Vulcano rounds are new. Germany uses the similar type of munitions, but they emphasis on smaller caliber (35mm Millenium Gun) combined with Missile Defence (IRIS-T) - SkyGuard.


So for example. What can a tank like i described achieve ?

It can support the troops with Guided Artillery fire. It can protect itself and the troops with AirBurst CIWS munitions from any aerial threats. It can transport the troops. So if needed, you could only produce them and they can do everything you need (Air Defence, Artillery Support and Transporting the Troops). You can only produce one platforms, and just spam it.

If you want higher caliber air defence, you can make dedicated 76mm Air Burst Autocannon unit, that can be operated by 2 persons. And when parked somewhere on standby (automated), the crew can get out and do not even need to be within the vehicle, as it is fully automated. Italy already uses this approach, and it is operational.


For these reasons. I would not invest on Laser equipment. I would invest on Autocannons. How i see things (and i suppose, how Italy sees it). Automated Autocannons is the platform for the future, and the development of Seek and Destroy algorithm for the Guided Artillery and Autocannon munitions in Low and Mid Range. That is the most Cost Effective way.

You do not need Drones or Loitering Munitions, if you have Guided Munitions. Guided Munitions are always superior to Drones, and you only use Drones because you are out of Guided Munitons, or do not have the option to acquire them. If you could choose as a commander, you would of course always choose a Guided Munition or Missile over Loitering Muniton or Drone because their properties are superior.

The Seek and Destroy Algorithm: can even be very simple. It only need to function Offline (as in high EW environment) and be able to confirm than target, seek and destroy (independently offline after the launch).

It is also a matter of Logistics. You need less storage space and less Maintenance. When you have less platforms with Motors, less Missiles (platforms with Motors) and so on.

Having stored enough Guided Rounds. Makes you very powerful player in the military scene. And they will be relevant now and forever. This will never change. (if they are Offline Guided).

(And if needed, can possibly be coated against Laser Weapons).


These Properties:

1. Is able to Seek and Destroy targets independently without Outside Guidance.

2. Is coated against Laser Weapons.

Then what you do, when opponent pummels endlessly with this kind of munition and you invested on Laser Defence, which is not functional against them. And your EW does nothing ?

And then when you launch your small supply of expensive Missiles to them, they get destroyed by high volume of Guided Air Burst Munitions which is a mainstay for even the most basic of troops.


It sounds very fancy and futuristic to speak of High Tech Laser Weapons and Autonomous Platforms. But in the end can very much be, that they achieve nothing and the direct approach is way more Efficient.

The only AI you really need is Seek and Destroy Algorithm.


The Rail Gun development i see as something that would be relevant. But the problem for it consuming too much energy to be practical may never be fixed, and there might never be new energy sources. The Cold Fusion probably, consumes more energy than produces because the laws of physics dictate so meaning, that most likely it can never be used as an Energy Source.

I also feel like, that certain Thresholds have been achieved in Technology Development on certain areas. That cannot be broken. The Laws of Physics dictate so, and the challenge is to fine tune the existing techniques rather than, find new ones as very possibly (in some cases), the new techniques are not there if the Laws of Physics cannot be altered.

Foe example, the technique for CIWS was originally introduced in the 70's (if i remember right) trough Phalanx CIWS, and stays relative for a long time to come. The challenge have been to fine tune it. But include modern Air Burst munition to the original Phalanx CIWS code, and it will be very effective even without changing the direction of the munitions in the air, what the current algorithm and development can achieve.

Still, even the oldest Phalanx CIWS have not outdated yet, and probably never will.

Of course the original Phalanx CIWS could not use the Air Burst munition without Update. But the Update for it would probably be very minor. The same with the guided Air Burst. It is probably not a major update for the Program, but a major update for the Ammunition it uses.