Directed Energy Weapons: Promise & Reality

Abstract

“Defense at the Speed of Light” has been the decades long motto for laser w eapons. High -energy lasers have undergone forty years of development and testing and are positioned to provide very real enhancements to military capabilities from tactical to strategic operations , yet there are virtually no truly high power laser weapons systems in the Department of Defense inventory . Remarkable progress has been made since the first invention of the solid state laser in the 1960s through gas dynamic, chemical, free electron and advanced solid state lasers pushing today’s state -of -the -ar t. Technology has been advanced through laboratory science and many integration and demonstration programs from the Baseline Demonstration Laser (BDL - 1973), the Navy -ARPA Chemical Laser (NACL - 1978), the Airborne Laser Laboratory (ALL ; 1972 - 1983), th e Mid -Infrared Chemical Laser (MIRACL) program (1980) , the Alpha Space Laser (SBL) program, the ground based Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) program, up to the current Airborne Laser (ABL) and the Airborne Tactical Laser (ATL) programs. The fundamentals of the physics of laser weapons systems are well understood and provide a background for decision criteria in laser beam production, beam quality, beam stabilization and wavefront control, and dwell time on target for lethality. The technical fundamental s necessary for fielding a complete weapons system, which is more than just the laser beam power generator or beam director and control syste m, are sufficiently mature . Critical technical issues in beam generation, beam control, target acquisition, tracki ng and pointing, atmospheric propagation, thermal management, lethality and kill assessment have been addressed and incorporated into decision making engineering design, eng agement and architecture models, such as Raytheon’s DEWSEM TM (Directed Energy Weapo n System Effectiveness Model) and the HELEEOS model (High Energy Laser End -to -End Operational Simulation) developed by the AFIT Center for Directed Energy. However, technology and doctrine have not come together to make HEL weapon systems compelling choic es for field commanders to enthusiastically embrace DEW. The full impact of all of the “ilities” of HEL weapons systems, including thermal and other waste management, life -cycle costs, as well as employment doctrine must progress along with technologica l evoluti on to achieve both the necessar y and sufficient conditions for DEW to take their place in our military inventory. Throughout the history of military weapons systems , that has only been accomplished on the battlefield, not in scientific laboratori es.