Thread: Directed energy weapons on the battlefield: A new vision for 2025

Originally Posted by Thomas1016

I posted in another thread a news article reporting the first deployable High energy battlefield laser. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11...time_for_xmas/ People read the report but had no comments. It made me wonder why. Do people not understand the implications for the future of warfare? below is a link to a paper put out by John P. Geis II, Lieutenant Colonel, USAF who was with the Center for Strategy and Technology Air War College The paper is dated 2003 so compare to what it says then to where we are today.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cst/csat32.pdf

Hello,

In this amateurs opinion:

My gut inclination is that Col. Geis might have extrapolated a wee bit much, but I suppose that is inescapable in the futurist business.

When we get down to brass tacks, a DEW is like any other weapon: just another tool that converts capital inputs and energy inputs into enhanced productivity.

Given the high level of capital and energy inputs inherent in DEW development and deployment, there are a few thoughts that come to mind in the pursuit of tactical utility and efficiency.

DEWs are for all intents and purposes LOS weapons. Yes, there are some clever people working on how to shoot DEWs around corners but these efforts increase cost, complexity and vulnerability. As LOS weapons, I suspect that some of the more perfected DEW technologies will see there utility and effectiveness increase in proportion to their altitude over the battle space. Maximum efficiency might not even be reached until we start talking about orbital platforms. As LOS weapons, the more we consider DEWs in a LD/SD type of role, the more attractive they appear.

I would not by any means consider the above to be an exclusive position. Dazzlers and point defense systems are two very fertile areas of DEW development with some weaponized systems already deployed and others that are essentially Beta ready. However, the real death rays would be pretty pointless in many surface basing scenarios.

Moving beyond gee whiz ray projectors, other classes of DEWs might find applications outside of what we might ordinarily consider. For instance, one might not think of a submarine as a great platform on which to mount a DEW but it might not be too far fetched. An explosively driven DEW ala HPM might make for a great mine or torpedo warhead to enhance effects against modern warships in the event of near misses or perhaps attack undersea communications lines. Such and approach takes advantage of OTS technologies and legacy systems which makes it a very attractive avenue for DEW development.

Another factor to consider is that many types of DEWs are relatively easy to defend against. Like the evolution of defense against CBWs, properly equipped, drilled and disciplined troops will be able to operate in a DEW rich environment.

Col. Geis speculated on the possibility that some may attempt to define DEWs as WMDs in which case an assymetric offset to their development and deployment might be achieved via International Convention. It would suck to pour a substantial amount of money and effort into DEWs just to have the international lawyers run an end game right around them.

I suppose what I am getting at is that while there are high hopes in many circles for DEW development, we must pick and choose very carefully. Lack of end user input, bad communication between lab coat and procurement types, inability of officers to grasp the technology involved, etc. have all been factors in poor system integration and performance in the past. Given the level of energy and capital inputs implicit in the weaponization and deployment of DEWs, such dangers are magnified substantially.

In closing, allow me to shift gears a little bit. If you take at face value Col. Geis' comments on force protection, consider one of my favorite penny stocks . If you have the stomach for today's stock markets, check out a teeny, tiny outfit in New Jersey called Epolin, Inc. (trades under EPLN on the NASDAQ).

Epolin, Inc. has positive EPS, a reasonable P/E, carries no debt, pays a 4% dividend (not bad for penny land!) and most importantly for purposes of this conversation has products available in the 532 nanometer range. It just so happens that some of the DEWs currently available for sale in the global marketplace, including a dazzler developed in partnership with DARPA, just happen to fire in the 532 nm wavelength .

I suspect that as the battlefield becomes an increasingly rich DEW/EM environment, Epolin, Inc. might do well. Best of all, you can get in today even on a Private's wages .

Regards,

William