• The UK said it test-fired a laser beam weapon in a “groundbreaking” trial.
  • The Ministry of Defence said it could neutralize targets for just $0.12 a shot.
  • Countries are racing to develop weapons that can combat drones and missiles.
  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    I know, I know, Quora, but this seems properly researched.

    $0.23 for a round of 5.56, $0.76 for a round of 7.62. Ish.

    Keep in mind, too, that lasers fire in about as straight a line as you can hope for, while bullets do not. It’s going to take a lot more bullets fired to neutralize a target than laser “rounds” fired.

    • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      And laser rounds have a velocity of the speed of light, so it’s pretty hard to miss if you have a perfect sight on the target

      • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I was thinking about potential for inaccuracy due to refraction from thermal inversion layers or other temperature anomalies, but then I realized that the refraction would equally affect the optics, provided that the optics remain on target throughout the firing.

        • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          If I was designing a laser weapons system, I would probably include a targeting laser that would be of the same wavelength, and use that to automatically correct any alignment. A targeting laser, or series of lasers would require extremely tiny amounts of power compared to firing the laser weapon.

    • 11111one11111@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah… those figures might be outdated. Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t 5.56 basically the same as a .223? If so Cabellas has them in a price range of $.60-$2.20/pc. Not that the price difference is what I’m correcting. What I intended to point out was that just because you can get ammo for $.23 doesn’t mean your actual cost is guna be $.23/pc. In my experience with cheap ammo you’re guna have at least 1 jammed per magazine on your best days. Unlike most things, you get what you pay for with ammo. I have 3 types of ammo for my AR. 1 cheap bulk box for making it rain lead at the range. 1 mid ranged box for actual use shooting coyotes, beavers and Coons. And the last ammo type are closer to the $2.20/pc price for when there is ever a scenario where I need to send 2 bullets through the same bullet hole from 500yds out. Lol half kidding but for real the bullet to bullet consistency for weight and concentricity of the $2.20 priced ammo to the .60 priced ammo is clear as day.

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Read the link. Those were rough prices for the military, and the poster admits that the prices are a little out of date. He’s not referring to what you’d pay at a sporting goods store.