US Army Fielding 50 Kilowatt Lasers in 2022 and 300 KW In 2024

The US Army will field 50 kilowatt (kW)-class lasers on a platoon of four Stryker vehicles in 2022. They will support the Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense (M-SHORAD) mission. The directed energy M-SHORAD capability is intended to protect maneuvering Brigade Combat Teams from unmanned aerial systems (UAS), rotary-wing aircraft, and rockets, artillery and mortar (RAM).

In May 2019, the Army approved a new strategy for accelerating the rapid prototyping and fielding of a variety of directed energy weapons to enable Army modernization.

Two laser vendors have about one year to produce the required laser subsystems, integrate them onto the Stryker platform, and complete a competitive performance checkout leading into a range demonstration against various threats.

If the results are good the US Army will buy three additional laser-equipped Strykers, for a total of four prototype vehicles that would be fielded to an operational M-SHORAD platoon in Fiscal Year 2022. The OTA award has the potential to increase to $490 million for the delivery of the four prototypes.

Under the new directed energy strategy, the Army is leveraging progress made in that effort in order to merge the HEL-TVD with Navy laser programs.

The Army and Navy will work to get 250-300 kW-class lasers around 2024. The more powerful lasers will defend against missiles and drones. The Army’s goal is to deliver four 250-300KW prototype lasers integrated on tactical vehicles, for a capability known as High Energy Laser-Indirect Fire Protection Capability (HEL-IFPC), to a platoon by Fiscal Year 2024.

31 thoughts on “US Army Fielding 50 Kilowatt Lasers in 2022 and 300 KW In 2024”

  1. There was a military test 4 years ago where ATHENA 30 kw laser burned a hole in a pickup truck skin and engine block in seconds from a mile away actually shutting down/killing the engine… Assuming it had to burn through roughly 1cm of steal to do that we can estimate that a 300 kW laser will burn through 10 cm of steal in seconds from over a mile away… This may not be the most effective way to kill a tank through the front plate but would work from the air into the skinny areas. As long as the beam penetrates into diesel tank or ammunition depo that tank will explode from within. . And this will work great against any other military vehicle including APCs.

  2. There was a military test 4 years ago where ATHENA 30 kw laser burned a hole in a pickup truck skin and engine block in seconds from a mile away actually shutting down/killing the engine… Assuming it had to burn through roughly 1cm of steal to do that we can estimate that a 300 kW laser will burn through 10 cm of steal in seconds from over a mile away… This may not be the most effective way to kill a tank through the front plate but would work from the air into the skinny areas. As long as the beam penetrates into diesel tank or ammunition depo that tank will explode from within. . And this will work great against any other military vehicle including APCs.

  3. You fail to account for the sheer speed if a laser, you can’t counter something moving the speed of light. Not to mention we can shoot tank shells out of the sky with these lasers we are testing, it isn’t much longer until some kinetics are phased out for the cheaper, lighter, and more effective alternative.

  4. True, but with the rate of advancement of lasers in the defense industry we shouldn’t be surprised in the late 2020’s when we have megawatt class lasers that can destroy anything you throw at them. But in the now we are testing the 300 kilowatt laser that can destroy drones and supersonic with precision, in the next 10 years we are just going to make them more effective.

  5. We are talking about 300 KW lasers, not the peashooters in service 3 years ago. A 300 KW laser would destroy optics and possible destroy the tanks turret, and you fail to account the speed that they can upgrade these lasers which would be quick. These systems are platforms that are modular so when there is an advancement in battery of laser tech then they will just remove the old and put in the new, no need for replacement.

  6. People seriously overestimate Russian power, every single little advancement they make is constantly covered and hyped up, that is what Authoritarian regimes do to make themselves seem powerful. Here in America we keep a laundry list of secret military weapons that sometimes the president doesn’t know about. Point being is people seriously overestimate Russia. As for the laser, at this point, can’t destroy a MBT but can destroy it’s sensors and probably turret. I, a kid in college studying physics and have experience with lasers would hold my breath about MBT destroying lasers until we reach megawatt class lasers. Although out current laser systems of around 300 KW can destroy drones, supersonic, and possibly airplanes.

  7. Those lasers you are referring to can’t burn through steel, it can for plastic but definitely not steel. You need a solid-state laser (no moving parts for efficiency) with a high energy light source, a crystalline host material to condense the energy, and a dopant such as neodymium. What you are recommending is a pea-shooter compared to the solid-state design that would support megawatt lasers that can slice through metal and take down aircraft in seconds.

  8. More likely they’ll give it a few coats of reflective and or ablative paint, or design a new shell casing to incorporate thicker protective coatings.

  9. No, look at current test videos with 20-50kw lasers, they all take a few seconds to kill thin skinned aluminum and steel mortar rounds and missiles. (<3mm thick) the time it would take to burn through a MBT hull is longer than the flight time of a missile.

  10. The advent of SpaceX and their essentially “free” access to space (compared to say Boeing) will be a game changer.
    You can throw 100 ton into orbit for a few million dollars
    instead of a billion dollars. And having infrastructure like
    SpaceX’s Starlink, with about 12-15 thousand satellites
    means you can’t be easily removed from orbit.

  11. Your unit conversion is wrong.

    1/1000 times 50 kW = 50 W, not 0.5 W.

    Having said that, I was using a 50W industrial laser a few days ago to cut up some sheeting, and it was cutting through 8 mm of plastic in seconds, not inches of steel.

  12. IGOR, so 1/1000 of a 50KW laser is 500mw. The strength of a strong laser pointer. What are you smoking to think that would cut through anything?. You are watching to much star wars

  13. A 50KW laser will not hardly even warm up armor on a tank or armed vehicle. These overpriced weapon systems ($490 million for 4 vehicles) are only designed to stop drones, light helicopters, rockets and mortars.

  14. If you think Russia or China will have any assets in the air during conflict with the US you are dreaming. US will have a full control of the sky and not just because of the lasers. Nontheless, 300 kv laser on the ground will easily keep the sky clear for many miles.

  15. Correct. Their range and effectiveness out of the atmosphere is greatly increased but you do run up against an interesting orbital mechanics and logistical problem (getting enough systems up in orbit to provide sufficient coverage).

  16. That’s true, but kinetic penetrators run up against issues of their own in terms of size, weight, and cost. A “kinetic” anti-tank missile would be enormous and extremely heavy if it were to have any appreciable range. You certainly wouldn’t be able to conceal such weapons and they’d be prime targets for cruise missiles or air assets.

  17. The easiest material for laser to burn through is metal, especially simple steel that Russian tanks are made of. Industrial lasers with 1/1000 the power levels of these ones can burn through inches of steel in seconds. ..

  18. This here laser will ignite the enemy’s cigarettes and heads as they come over the horizon. Welcome to the future boys!

  19. You talking about that boom stick that you have to keep aimed all the way to the target and it takes a few minutes to get there?

    You are to dumb to realize that the laser will not only burn through your Russki tin cans but also vaporize any missile wanna be coming its way.

  20. I wonder what power level you would require to take out a ballistic missile?
    I would imagine it would be in the megawatt range, if that.

  21. These lasers are no where near powerful to cut through a main battle tank (though they might be able to do a number on external optics and the like. As mentioned, they are designed to shoot down small, fast moving, but thin-skinned aerial craft. Like drones, missiles, and even artillery shells.

  22. Nonsense. A Kornet ATGM will blow this hunk-a-junk away before it gets anywhere near to pose a threat.

Comments are closed.