UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Titan
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 14 Nov 2019, 19:18
Location: United Kingdom

Lasers on the Type 45s?

Postby Titan » 16 Nov 2019, 20:56

Hi all, new here.

I don't know if anyone has been watching "Warship: Life at Sea on Ch5" about a Type 45, but in the third episode just as the ship goes to action stations for the very first time, the sailor says, the "lasers are being set free." Unless it's my hearing...

I'm not aware we have lasers on our warships yet and I only know of one American ship that's equipped with a prototype laser. Anyone know anything about this?

I posted this on another forum and apart from one sarcastic response, somebody else thought it could be Dragonfire. Here's a article about Dragonfire from 2017:

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/dragonf ... er-weapon/

The episodes are on catch up/the My5 app and he says it around about 32.50.

What do others think?

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4336
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 16 Nov 2019, 23:53

Titan wrote:Hi all, new here.

I don't know if anyone has been watching "Warship: Life at Sea on Ch5" about a Type 45, but in the third episode just as the ship goes to action stations for the very first time, the sailor says, the "lasers are being set free." Unless it's my hearing...

I'm not aware we have lasers on our warships yet and I only know of one American ship that's equipped with a prototype laser. Anyone know anything about this?

I posted this on another forum and apart from one sarcastic response, somebody else thought it could be Dragonfire. Here's a article about Dragonfire from 2017:

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/dragonf ... er-weapon/

The episodes are on catch up/the My5 app and he says it around about 32.50.

What do others think?


Hi Titan, welcome aboard!

I would guess range finding/tracking lasers. Not the shoot `em down type.

Wish we had that show in the states.

S M H
Member
Posts: 409
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby S M H » 17 Nov 2019, 13:31

Ron5 wrote:I would guess range finding/tracking lasers. Not the shoot `em down type.
I m inclined to suggest that the navy retained the none lethal distraction lasers that we developed in the 1980s. Successfully kept quite until someone forgot to cover a frigate set up on entry to port. They effectively disoriented the pilot if close to the ship. Was claimed to have been used on the Argentinian in 1982 by some of there pilots.

Titan
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 14 Nov 2019, 19:18
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Titan » 17 Nov 2019, 15:13

Yeah, I remember the Argentinian pilots claiming to feel sick when they were close to our ships, so it could be something like that. But if we had tech more than 30 years ago, then surely there must be something better now?

The article says that Dragonfire was to be installed by the end of 2019 on a ship, but this article from the Sun in May says that the tech is still 5-10 years from deployment:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/8995561/r ... pon-laser/

Seems an odd thing for a sailor to say, "the lasers are being free," it its merely just a tracking device.

S M H
Member
Posts: 409
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby S M H » 17 Nov 2019, 16:14

Titan wrote:eah, I remember the Argentinian pilots claiming to feel sick when they were close to our ships, so it could be something like that. But if we had tech more than 30 years ago, then surely there must be something better now?
Know as laser dazzlers. Kept under wraps until HMS Andromeda entered port with them uncovered in 1987. I Know that the Monk of Dunfermline. (I can not afford to call him what Mr J Clarkson did) Wanted then banned along with Cluster bombs & Tactical Nuclear Weapons.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4336
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 17 Nov 2019, 18:39

S M H wrote:
Titan wrote:eah, I remember the Argentinian pilots claiming to feel sick when they were close to our ships, so it could be something like that. But if we had tech more than 30 years ago, then surely there must be something better now?
Know as laser dazzlers. Kept under wraps until HMS Andromeda entered port with them uncovered in 1987. I Know that the Monk of Dunfermline. (I can not afford to call him what Mr J Clarkson did) Wanted then banned along with Cluster bombs & Tactical Nuclear Weapons.


They have been banned. Illegal now.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1910
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Caribbean » 17 Nov 2019, 21:43

Ron5 wrote:They have been banned. Illegal now.

Dazzlers are still legal. The ban is on using lasers that cause "permanent blindness to unenhanced vision", (Article 1 , Protocol IV of 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons - came into effect in 1998).

Article 3 says "Blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment of laser systems, including laser systems used against optical equipment, is not covered by the prohibition of this Protocol."
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4336
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 17 Nov 2019, 22:12

Caribbean wrote:
Ron5 wrote:They have been banned. Illegal now.

Dazzlers are still legal. The ban is on using lasers that cause "permanent blindness to unenhanced vision", (Article 1 , Protocol IV of 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons - came into effect in 1998).

Article 3 says "Blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment of laser systems, including laser systems used against optical equipment, is not covered by the prohibition of this Protocol."


What you have posted exactly describes the banning of "dazzlers". The British equipment was designed & used to damage the pilots vision. They are no longer fitted on any RN ship.

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1702
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 17 Nov 2019, 22:27

Ron5 wrote:What you have posted exactly describes the banning of "dazzlers". The British equipment was designed & used to damage the pilots vision. They are no longer fitted on any RN ship.


The dazzlers used by the RN were, and are, perfectly legal. They weren't designed to blind the pilots or damage their eyesight. Instead the dazzlers were designed to interact with tiny, imperceptible, scratches that occur on any aircraft's windows and canopy. When the dazzler was pointed at an enemy aircraft the light interacted with these tiny scratches and caused them to fluoresce. To all intents and purposes the canopy would light up like a fluorescent lighting tube. The pilots vision would be unaffected but they would be unable to see out of the aircraft. The effect was the aircraft either going out of control and crashing due to pilot disorientation or the pilot pulling the aircraft up and aborting an attack run (and also making the aircraft more vulnerable to weapons).

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1910
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Caribbean » 17 Nov 2019, 23:20

Ron5 wrote:What you have posted exactly describes the banning of "dazzlers". The British equipment was designed & used to damage the pilots vision. They are no longer fitted on any RN ship.

Not so. The key word here is "permanent damage". I remember reading a post (over on ARRSE, I believe) by someone who had operated the laser systems during the Falklands. He was clear that they were not designed to permanently blind, only to dazzle and disorient. Temporarily affecting someone's sight does not contravene the Convention.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 12613
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 18 Nov 2019, 04:24

Caribbean wrote:Temporarily affecting someone's sight does not contravene the Convention.
This situation came to a test when the Chinese were testing their kit on American pilots in Djibouti (why the h@ll are the two bases so close to each other? Too few cows around there so the only things that can be milked are foreign gvmnts for basing rights... I wonder why the French decamped to the Gulf?)
- 'anyhoo' the case, despite protests, did not get hauled in front of any tribunal

Timmymagic
Senior Member
Posts: 1702
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Timmymagic » 18 Nov 2019, 09:48

Caribbean wrote:I remember reading a post (over on ARRSE, I believe) by someone who had operated the laser systems during the Falklands.


All the evidence suggests that Outfit DEC never made it down to the Falklands in time, and was never used there. It may have gone South on a couple of ships relieving the task force at the end of the war.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4336
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 19 Nov 2019, 17:18

Good set of replies but I remain unconvinced. I don't know how you can target a pilots eyes with a laser and still claim it's not meant to harm his (or her) eyesight. There's no way the power of the laser can be modulated to such precision to temporary blind as opposed to permanently.

Anyhoo, not currently fitted for whatever reason you prefer.

S M H
Member
Posts: 409
Joined: 03 May 2015, 12:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby S M H » 19 Nov 2019, 19:19

Timmymagic wrote:All the evidence suggests that Outfit DEC never made it down to the Falklands in time, and was never used there. It may have gone South on a couple of ships relieving the task force at the end of the war
So some one removed them of Battleaxe type 22 as she was testing them before she sailed south.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 1910
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Location: England

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Caribbean » 20 Nov 2019, 07:13

Ron5 wrote:I don't know how you can target a pilots eyes with a laser and still claim it's not meant to harm his (or her) eyesight.

I'm pretty sure that the limits of what the human eye can tolerate without being permanently damaged are well known. You don't need to damage the pilot's eyesight, you just need to disrupt the attack.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 4355
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Lord Jim » 20 Nov 2019, 08:58

In theory, how different from shooting down a plane with a missile would turning up the power on a laser, blinding the pilot and causing the plane to crash? In both cases even if the pilot survived he or she could be seriously injured. I also think such weapons are a law suit waiting to happen given the current scrutiny of combat these days. Just the hint of a weapon that could blind someone is likely to cause serious negative press and demands for it to be withdrawn from multiple sources. Of course countries like Russia and China will simply ignore such actions.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 4336
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby Ron5 » 21 Nov 2019, 15:49


cky7
Member
Posts: 173
Joined: 13 Dec 2015, 20:19

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby cky7 » 22 Nov 2019, 01:08

Ron5 wrote:
Wish we had that show in the states.


Google the show’s name followed by putlocker (keep your anti virus up to date or use a Mac) and you can watch that (or any other) show in the states!! ;) :shh: :P

NickC
Member
Posts: 661
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 14:20
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Royal Navy Gunnery Discussion

Postby NickC » 22 Feb 2020, 15:42

FWIW an update on the Leonardo OTO Merlo 76 mm/62 caliber gun with its STRALES/DART (Driven Ammunition Reduced Time of flight) round. The Dardo-F gun fire control system with a Ku-band, high frequency/high definition ~1 inch/short range fire control radar (seen mention of the Leonardo Selex NA-25X which is a puzzle as it's X-band) projecting four beams, two to illuminate and follow the target and two to follow the shell fired against it. The DART is a saboted 76 mm round that fires the 42 mm DART projectile at 1200 mps /~4,000 fps (leading to higher barrel wear due the high temperatures created by the large amount of propellant required to achieve 1200 mps), 42 mm projectile guided by six ailerons, fired in single round or three round burst. Video Aug 2018 shows trials of 3 round burst fired at Banshee target 100 mps/Mach 0.3 at 10 m altitude, acquired target at 10 km, fired at 5 km, first round hit at 4.5 km, third at 4.4 km.

Assuming similar scenario with the Bofors 57 mm 3P round, fired at 1,035 mps/3,400 fps, 16% slower than the DART projectile and additionally DART with its smaller dia of 43 mm lower drag its time of flight to target will be faster than the 3P round, need an expert in ballistics to work out actual figure, would guess max effective AA 57 mm 3P range drop to ~4 km to hit similar Mach 0.3 target, with a Mach 0.9 Exocet missile the 3P effective range will drop to ~1.3 km and with Brahmos Mach 2.8 drops to miniscule 400 metres, with a high probability the Brahmos with it's large mass/kinetic energy it will still hit ship.

If my fag packet calcs totally garbage would appreciate feedback (DoD/DARPA, seeking $116 million funding in FY2021 to develop a tactical-range, hypersonic boost-glide weapon for the US Air Force and Navy, how practical as basis of anti-ship missile no ideal).



Return to “Royal Navy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests