Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Beyond jamming, I imagine some kind of autonomous laser system could also be pretty effective at downing large numbers of drones within a given radius.


There's a few, but they're large, expensive, require a lot of electricity and have limited range; there's the Silent Hunter [0] which is 30-100 kilowatts max power but which has a range of up to 4 kilometers. Raytheon has a 10 kilowatt palletized version that can go on a truck bed [1]; I can't find any numbers but it's listed as short-range, so I presume it's only effective at distances of less than 1 km, probably only tens or hundreds of meters. Plus they need to detect the drones first, but there's multiple ways to do that. It likely needs a network of detectors though.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Hunter_(laser_weapon)

[1] https://www.rtx.com/raytheon/what-we-do/integrated-air-and-m...


EOS (Aust) have a 50-100kW system, 4 km range.

https://eos-aus.com/defence/high-energy-laser-weapon/

What they are good at is target tracking, having started out in satellite communication.

Their tracking system paired with a 30mm Bushmaster cannon and proximity ammo is another solution, and there are apparently 160 of them heading for Ukraine to be mounted on M113 and Kozak vehicles.

https://eos-aus.com/defence/counter-drone-systems/slinger/


Israel published last week that it made a trial run of the iron beam (10km range or so) during conflict with hezbollai. It had 40 intercepts and full operational deployment is scheduled for this year


Lasers aren't effective. Most of the drone is just an empty frame. The control board is pretty tiny, as is the ordnance. Targeting those or the propulsion systems is quite difficult. Sure, you can punch holes in the chassis but it takes a lot of guesswork to hit something vital. It's the wrong weapon. Something with an area of effect, like a shotgun or a net is much better suited to stopping drones.


Are you sure about that? AFAIK effective laser drone defenses are not yet widely deployed proven technology, but I don't think small beam size is a limiting factor. Getting enough power onto the target to disable it is a big challenge, but part of that is fighting the natural tendency of the beam to spread out & be attenuated by the atmosphere - not that the beam affects too small of a spot on the drone.

Having a laser that spreads out to e.g. 30cm radius at 500m is not hard to do if you need an area of effect weapon & can push enough power (ie. your laser is powerful enough, but not so intense that it ionizes the air & blocks itself). Reflections seem like a bigger problem: If the most effective defense includes guys with shotguns &/or there are a lot of unprotected personnel in the area, how do you make sure stray reflections don't end up blinding them?


The point is that a focused laser will put a hole through the drone, much like an armor piercing round, but that is often insufficient to disable the drone. A larger ballistic projectile (think a solid shell or a rock) is much more effective. Alternative energy weapons based on microwaves and SPL also work well.


Presumably hitting any rotor, even a small amount, could be enough to bring it down? They're finely balanced things


Already tested. Success rate is too low. A great deal of aenergy gets wasted.

Remember, this is about asymmetric warfare. If the number of rounds or amount of energy required costs more than the drone it shoots down, then it's not an effective deterrent. Militaries are looking for single-shot weapons to take down drones. Fire once and move on. It's the only way to deal with a swarm. Think about it for a bit and it will become very obvious.


Israel published last week that it (trialed) deployed laser system to shoot down drones year ago at North. It had 40 intercepts or so. Full operational deployment scheduled for the end of this year


You mean the demo done recently? The article might be misleading. The IDF tested 20 different systems produced by their military OEMs. It wasn't just lasers, and lasers are far from being the clear winner. Here's the official post, it contains a demonstration video:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/israelimod_israel-mod-complet...



Did you read your own article? It was developed last year and one of the weapons tested in February of this year as per the IDF post. The rest is Rafael marketing speak.


Did you read the article ? It starts with

>In a historic breakthrough, the IDF on Wednesday announced that an unnamed laser defense system similar to the much celebrated Iron Beam laser system has shot down dozens of aerial threats during the war.

>Already in fall 2024, The Jerusalem Post had learned that the IDF had used laser defense systems in operational situations but was barred from reporting on that at the time.

It was all over Israeli news together with videos of operational intercepts.

it has nothing to do with "february cookoff" of different systems and orders for iron beam were placed in january with deployment by the end of the year


> orders for iron beam were placed in january with deployment by the end of the year

Do you have a credible source from the IDF attesting to this?

And do you believe the IDF would conduct a demonsttation after it has already committed to a system?


>Do you have a credible source from the IDF attesting to this?

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/laser-intercept...

it been all over Israeli news. not exactly "news"

>And do you believe the IDF would conduct a demonsttation after it has already committed to a system?

what demonstration are you talking about ? if you are talking about whatever was published in february, it's mostly for more tactical/mobile use i believe.

there is an issue that north of israel is very hilly, so it's possible to fly drones from lebanon below radar visibility range and then just to get them pop-up 50km away from border. it was major problem last year and the publicized trials a believe concentrated on sourcing systems to solve this issue.


This is what a guy can do in his garage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBVlL0FNbSE

It punches through titanium sheet in seconds.


The main defence drones have against both lasers and Bofors-type guns is staying low, such that they are below the horizon or behind ground clutter until as late as possible.


Now imagine that but with a shotgun shooting bird/buck shot at decent ROF. Way better.

The problem with any point defense system is radiating any energy makes you a big target. So you would want a passive (EO/IR?) or triggered active/passive system.


Why nobody us building automated shotgun based solutions for anti-air defenses... maybe they need more than 100-150m reliable reach? Having 300 of those covering one airfield may not be ideal, nor cost effective, nor easy to manufacture and deploy and maintain in such numbers... we talk about russia after all, they let most of their strategic bombers arrogantly unprotected on runways with full gas tanks.

I don't think western common folks grok how depraved that country is in terms of doing good work, reward systems for such and corruption on every single level. puttin' built a mafia state and pushed this behavior from top->bottom, and these are side effects. Not some soviet competence and discipline, which wasn't stellar either but light years ahead of current state.


India had successfully used its age old L70, Zu23 guns to track and shot down 500+ turkish drones sent by pak. All these legacy weapons are modernised with passive drone tracking, locking, targetting and automated firing system. https://theprint.in/defence/how-upgraded-l-70-guns-or-origin...


I really don't care what Russia does, but in a future war USA is more likely to be attacked by asymmetric exploding drones than to be attacking with them. That I _do_ care about. And for that, a PDS system on a few trucks seems kind of useful. If they can be made cheaply and the expensive bits centralized, then a few $1k every 100 yards is kind of reasonable, don't you think?


That's basically what ammo such as AHEAD is. It bursts before reaching the target and sends out shrapnel in a shotgun-like pattern.


They’re parked in the open because of the treaty requiring those type of assets be observable by spy satellites. The USA in turn does the same.


Nope. You are talking about the New Start treaty.

1) Russia suspended the treaty 2023, so it is not relevant here.

2) The use of hangars is not prohibited, as can be seen by the climatized hangars that the US keeps their B1 in.

3) Russia has announced plans for such reinforced hangars years ago, but very likely some dacha or yacht had higher priority.


My mistake! I missed the news about the suspension, thanks for clarifying.


12 gauge would be fairly strong medicine, but it has to be close in. If the drone is a stabilized gun platform with the ability to aim decently well (<4 MoA @ 100 yards) that's not going to be a winning battle.


Taking the discussion back to reality, almost all uses of drones at the moment are via suicide ("wire guided COTS missiles", you might call them), or just plain old recon. There are probably still plenty of grenades dropped from hover as well.

For those uses, there's a fairly decent approach ["missile"] or hover ["bomber"] stage that is probably plenty vulnerable to autonomous PDS via 12 guage medicine.

Tracking / detection could even be passive, partly acoustic, partly EO/IR, with only a small fire control radar if you really want it.


That’s assuming there’s a single drone and not an intelligent swarm that will circle around you.


Yes, I'm assuming reality.


We've had acoustic gunshot detection for years at this point though. It's not like a shotgun firing is a quiet event.


There's a huge difference between firing back at an enemy that is attacking, and spraying radio signals all over the horizon even though nobody is attacking yet. The former won't tell them anything new, but the latter (which I'm talking about), is (was?) considered somewhat dangerous.

When I said "triggered" I meant you would enable it when under attack, at which point it doesn't matter if they know you're there anymore.


Are shotgun pellets supersonic?


Best-case scenario: The expensive laser system just became the most obvious and highest-value target in the area.


Take 5 drones, sneak from other directions and simply overwhelm the system. If in pair, multiply the attackers via some decoys, it becomes just a statistics game.

I can imagine this protecting some future US bases in same way C-RAM is used. But from what I read from ie Iraq veterans they had it turned off most of the time for the fear of shooting down its own planes. So much for trust in high tech if its too powerful and automated.

Chinese have some systems, but from demo I've seen the laser beam took some serious time to shoot a single missile. Drones are smaller and way more fragile (so also harder to hit) but this ain't Star trek or Star wars.


Depends, in this case the strategic bombers are worth more.


Micro-scale, very likely true.

Bigger picture - if knocking the laser defense off-line slashes the unit cost of destroying bombers, then it may be the obvious first move in any competent attack.


One thing I haven't seen explored is using autonomous drones as defense. Like hand sized drones optimized for speed and maneuverability intercepting larger drones. They should be super cheap. They would also be small enough for troops and vehicles to carry one.


Anduril Anvil does drone-drone intercepts from a few years ago.


I'm thinking the same thing. You don't even need to fully destroy the drone, if you manage to damage the camera sensors or the exposed lithium cell it's game over for the drone.


How close are we to making a system that can have multiple counter measures autonomously deployed?

(1) if prop based, launch something to snare the props (2) if reflective, pre-launch something to spray black non-reflective paint at it, and followup with laser (3) if evasive, approach with random manouvers (4) if unknown, launch everything and see what works, and feed it back to the training data ... etc, etc.


Mirrors are not an effective defense against military lasers. The power levels are too high and dielectric mirrors only work over narrow wavelengths. In the specific case of US military tech, some of the platforms use white lasers such that even dielectric mirrors are pointless.


>Mirrors are not an effective defense against military lasers

So the cartoons lied to me?


I would try a shotgun style subsonic load with an adjustable fin/spoiler system that can be calibrated relative to the range of the target. The projectiles fin would flare out to reduce speed as it approached the target. Then an explosive charge would release a spray of super glue or pancake syrup, or something to gunk up the mechanism or disrupt the airflow on the propeller.


Maybe not completely, at least not for the camera sensors. If it has good enough initial targeting data - or a good enough last image from the camera - it may be able to find the target by inertial navigation from there (depending on laser range, of course).


> it may be able to find the target by inertial navigation from there

Or miss by a long shot and hit a civilian instead.


It still takes few seconds per target with technologies available right now. That's likely the reason why an operational anti drone laser turret is not a thing yet.


> operational anti drone turret is not a thing yet.

I’ve read about a bunch of these systems even if they aren’t in widespread deployment some are still being tested in real world conditions.

What about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Hunter_(laser_weapon)

“The Silent Hunter has been used by Saudi Arabia to guard against Houthi drones and missiles.”

“During the World Defense Show in Riyadh the February 05, 2024, Poly Technologies announced the first hard-kill engagement of a one-way attack drone.[6]”


Again, it takes few seconds per target with current laser tech. Which means they don't have important simultaneous multi target engagement capability.

The targets, whether it's plumbing pipe rockets or lipo drones, come in at 100-1000 yards/sec, so you don't really have that many seconds per target.

They work in the demo in which you just shoot down the sole target as it fly perpendicular to the machine for both physical and career safety, but when it comes to deploying the thing around your bed, guns make a lot more sense.


The quotes suggest that system has actually been deployed and used successfully in real world conditions.

Also, your objection doesn’t really fit how drones have been used. Massive highly coordinated drone swarms are extremely unusual, the threat is mostly individual drones or small clusters.

Many very dangerous drones are well under 100y/s aka 200mph.

1000 yards/second aka Mach 2.7 is well beyond the ‘drones’ people are concerned with and into expensive missile territory. Which is where anti missile systems get used.



It's extremely easy to make surfaces partly reflective and extremely hard to make lasers outside of labs more powerful.


More powerful than what? If StyroPyro can build handheld 200W+ LED laser device in his workshop [0], why wouldn't a sufficiently funded military be able to build an anti-drone laser with the same (or higher) power output?

Note that his laser burns through various reflective materials, including mirrors, copper, aluminium, and steel.

[0] https://youtu.be/UBVlL0FNbSE


Burning stuff at 20 feet is much easier than burning stuff at thousands of feet in distance.


If a drone is 90% reflective it doesn't need a weapon besides your laser.. (If the star wars approach weren't a scam to enter an ever more expensive race as the side with more money than sense.)



I think you'll probably see mini flak guns, lasers, microwaves, and defensive kamikaze drones as the main defensive tools




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: