Slashdot Mirror
Laser Powers Lockheed Martin's Stalker Drone For 48 Hours
garymortimer writes "Lockheed Martin (LMT) and LaserMotive, Inc., recently demonstrated the capabilities of an innovative laser power system to extend the Stalker Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) flight time to more than 48 hours. This increase in flight duration represents an improvement of 2,400 percent. Stalker is a small, silent UAS used by Special Operations Forces since 2006 to perform intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions."
a reason to have sharks with friggin laser beams on their head.
No on felt the need to mention what the "laser power system" is, but what I gather it's just concentrating the power into a beam to wirelessly charge the UAV without landing. I don't know what the strength/distance of the beam is though.
From the article, "At the conclusion of the flight test, held in a wind tunnel,"
So they've pointed a laser at a photocell indoors, this is so far from doing it over hostile territory as to be laughable.
I'm sure that any airborne attackers will greatly appreciate this opportunity to locate the ground station.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
now we have to devise a way to get a laser-sourcing UAV to fly (for 48 hrs) within range of this one to relay the juice
Ask a man who can hit a dime with a rifle at 300 yards
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
<LMT> "Stalker is a small... it's only half the size of a predator drone!"
<guy> "Oh?... How large is a predator drone?"
<LMT> "The size of a bus."
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
That only happens in Hollywood...
and how many fractions of a second is that? How much current can that generate?
Otherwise it'll be pretty obvious (in any atmospheric conditions where there are particles or aerosols) as to just where the drone (and base!) is.
Of course with a pair of night vision goggles the same might be true of an infra-red laser. How about x-ray? ;)
You can power them from satellites rather than ground based - you'll escape all the dust and much of the atmospheric crap, and your power will be free from the sun. Park a satellite over the Middle East and you have LOS everywhere.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
earth is curved, lasers are straight, how many seconds can you actually do this in the field before you loose the tiny target ... not counting in wind, drift, clouds, rain, or some dipshit playing with his watch?
Stabilized aiming platforms better not be a challenge for the military. Hell, there are kids making segway-clones and auto-aim-paintgun-bots out of web cams, Arduinos, and old inkjet printer stepper motors. You think a funded organization with a military product can't simply place an order with www.mobileweaponsplatforms-R-us.com and have one delivered tomorrow?
John
before you loose the tiny target
I doubt they're using a material that will shrink due to the laser heat. I'm pretty sure it'll be fixed pretty tightly...
I was so hoping for that link to be real.
I went to their website and it was down.
The laser will make a nice locator for anti-aircraft fire, too. /FAIL
We don't want laser powered drones, we want friggin' laser powered sharks!
And where the fuck's my flying car?
I'm no pro (though I've been shooting a long time), and I can reliably put 25 x .22lr rounds on a quarter at 100 yards, prone, sling (no rest), using only the aperture sights on my anschutz. With a .308, good glass, a couple sighting rounds and good conditions, a pro could almost certainly land a good percentage of rounds fired on a dime. I wouldn't bet what I have in my wallet that I could do it, though.
But I think the original point was, with a computer controlling a recoilless device that isn't affected by crosswind like a bullet... I'm sure you could easily keep a laser on a car-sized target at a mile if you needed to. We've achieved far more complicated feats than that.
"No birds were blinded in the making of this invasion."
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Really drones are safe! We've been using them for YEARS!
Stalker... that's a nice name for a drone.
The complete series will go something like Stalker, Creep, Pedo.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Here are some issues that are greatly simplified by testing indoors in a wind tunnel;
1. Tracking; The aircraft does not move therefore tracking is trivial.
2. Range; Sure it may work at a few feet but does it work at a few kilometers?
3. Atmospheric conditions; Atmospheric conditions can be completely controlled indoors. Does it work in heat haze, rain, snow, dust, etc. at range?
At least do a test that remotely approximates a real world situation. Everyone knows that power can be transmitted by laser which is all that this test proves .. again. It still has not overcome the many known issues with using lasers to transmit power to aircraft. I effect it proves what has already been proven many times ind is not an advance at all.
It does not matter how stable the aiming platform is it it can not track the target that is unstable as it reacts to winds. The other issue is that lasers are dispersed by airborne particles (dust), rain, head haze, range, etc. Will enough energy be transmitted over kilometers to keep the UAV in the air? What about trees, buildings and hills? Will they obstruct the beam. How heavy is the sending laser? The Stalker is designed to be deployable by a single Special Forced soldier. Can one deploy the laser recharger too?
...I can attach it to some frikkin' sharks?
While I can see applications for something like this, I don't see how espionage and special forces ops are among them.
The whole point of these kinds of operations is to not let anybody know they are happening. They even talk about this drone as being extra quiet and stealthy. So, if that is the case, does it really make sense to shine a big laser at it? Maybe you could start it out quiet and then only turn the laser on after the bullets start flying, which makes more sense for special forces than espionage.
Where I could see something like this as being more useful is general surveillance of established territory. If I had a base that I had to protect it would be nice to have cameras orbiting up high showing me everything going on around me. The base isn't a secret, and in fact is a target. The bad guys already know I probably have drones. This just makes it possible for me to actually have drones all the time. If the bad guys try to shoot one down, well, I know something is up, which is their whole point.
Laser painting with the hard job done by the owners :-)
Since it's a laser to deliver power, why can't it be mounted on a satellite?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAdj6vpYppA
"America! Fuck Yeah!"
"What you gona do when we come for you?"
"America! Fuck Yeah!"
(Thankfully) 48 Hours in a wind tunnel under controlled circumstances is a long way from 48 hours flying in varying wind, through tree cover, around obstacles and dealing with weather conditions (humidity, rain, clouds, sunshine, heat, etc).
So that's what they need the Sharks with freaking Laser beams for...
Why dose technology increase to reduce the man kind all the time. Can these UAS used to calculate the exact number of elephants in the world.
It recharges by a bunch of military personal with laser pointers? Won't that give the location away?
while the target is flying away at 100mph +?
Oh good, so now they can not only shine a big, bright, detectable light on the drone but it can also be traced back to the charging station on the other end of the beam. What a brilliant military invention! Since this has no practical use whatsoever on foreign battlefields, I think they just wanted to build a giant, high powered laser with a good tracking system. Now that they could turn into something useful.
Well,
for recharging the drone can leave the operation area. E.g. if it is a carrier based drone it moves 10km out of the surveilance area closer to the carrier and get recharged in flight. Saves the full round trip and the landing / launching.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Just in time for today's dilbert
http://www.dilbert.com/2012-07-12/
Me thinks the laser will be "fired" by satellite. More stable, GPS auto tracking of the drone make it possible to have accurate pinpoint of the vehicle and alot less particles. Also laser are not strainght lines as many would beleive. Do a little research on laser, gravity and refraction.
Have fun.
One that works out of the box at a moment's notice, survives a 10km trip in the hot sun, and run precisely to target at high efficiency?
Just because the concepts are easy enough for the kids to demonstrate doesn't mean it scales for everything else. If you want that aircraft with a hell-fire missile fly over your house using an Arduino and web cam, be my guest. Otherwise, stick with you social network technologies as high tech.
Note, Laser motive is also involved with the space elevator challenge, and looks like they need a more realistic application to continue their power beaming development.
presumably, without researching, they would use some small mirrors that can be varied in position in extreme speeds to stabilize the ray on the drone - but still, that's the part that I'd have asked them to prove that works.. not a stupid wind tunnel test.
of course it's useless if it needs _constant_ recharge. but it could just return to the charging area every now and then.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
no.. that's not really the point, it recharges a drone whilst it's in air.
it's presumably to be used in situations where it doesn't matter that you give your position away.
it's not for a guerilla mission, but for mop up, think about keeping an eye on protest campers and fighting against guerillas who already know where your base is.
it's not to be used in a situation where it's a certain sized and enabled group vs. another. but more like elephant(usa) against a squirrel. squirrel knows where the elephant is but the elephant is going to need some help to find the squirrel to stomp on it.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
In the last year there was a test of a real world tracking system aimed at an aircraft. I don't remember the date, but it was published on a NOTAM keeping pilots 100km away from a test area because they were shining a laser on a target aircraft. It certainly could be related to this test.
I suspect the laser will be vehicle mounted, as it will need a lot more power than a soldier can carry. There's no technical reasons to limit one vehicle to carry only one laser, and also no reason one laser couldn't maintain several drones.
The nice thing about maintaining LOS to an aircraft is that they can simply fly up to solve most problems with ground clutter. Park your laser on any hilltop in your control, and get your shine on. Don't have any nearby hilltops? Well, they're the Army, they can just take one. It's what they do, and they're very good at it.
I don't know why people think tracking an aircraft can't be done. "Oh, no, the target is unstable and the air is dirty, it'll never work!" Just because it's a problem seems hard does not automatically make it impossible for someone dedicated to the task. Anyway, they appear to be too busy overcoming the problems to realize it's impossible.
John
It probably won't be satellite based, because the problem with satellites is delivering enough energy up to space (there are no gas stations up there.) It will probably be vehicle based, where you just drive a truck to the highest peak on the battlefield.
The straightness of the line might matter a little bit for coarse initial acquisition of the drone, but not in continual precision mode. Not being mathematically "straight" doesn't matter because the system almost certainly employs feedback from the target UAV. If the laser is hitting the drone to the left of the target's dead center, its response will cause the laser to recenter to the right. Doesn't matter how straight it is, as long as the energy finds its way into the drone's batteries. Did you ever build a sunlight follower, where you had a vertical shade separating two photocells, and the difference between them measured by an LM738 that drove the tracking motor? (Popular Electronics had plans back in the 1970s.) Maintaining aim on a fast-moving distant target uses the same principles, only with digital electronics, RF messaging, lasers, and really high speed, high precision deflectors.
And if you want to know how to drive a laser beam really, really fast, faster than even a galvanic mirror in a Laser Floyd light show, (got to keep up with the Droneses, after all,) a KTN deflector can operate up to 10 degrees at speeds of up to 100kHz, and is available to handle wavelengths from visible to infrared. Wow.
John
It does not matter how stable the aiming platform is it it can not track the target that is unstable as it reacts to winds.
Oh please. This is a solved problem. I used to work on satellite-tracking applications that maintained accuracies of tenths of a degree. On board a ship. During a hurricane. And that was just for satellite broadband so people could surf the internet. The really mission critical applications gets more attention. This will not be difficult.
> Since it's a laser to deliver power, why can't it be mounted on a satellite?
1) We're not talking relatively low-power TV broadcast satellites where the receiving antenna gets a few microvolts, maybe millivolts from the satellite. Lasers capable of recharging a drone in flight require a lot of power, and it's bleeping expensive to continuously refuel/resupply a satelite even in low earth orbit. Just look at the costs of ISS (International Space Station).
2) Assuming that you could mount a powerful laser in low earth orbit, and refuel it as necessary, you'd have a HUGE military threat. The Russians and Chines would want to build their own. No need to power drones or whatever to attack enemies. "Blast them from orbit" instead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamonds_Are_Forever_(film)
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
that can home in on a laser, this might not turn out to be such a hot idea. Oh, wait....
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
This is an experimental technology at best, it is MUCH cheaper to use solar to power for an observation craft at high altitude. NASA did the cheaper thing for once.
Using a space based solar collector laser I can see this being a viable way of keeping planes aloft until they just wear out...sounds good to me!
If you were not posting as an anonymous coward, I would take the bet, but chances are your wallet doesn't have much anyway.
I think you misread what I said. I don't think I could manage it.
I do know that pros and other well-practiced marksmen, can. Carlos Hathcock hit a moving target at over 2,200 yards back in the 60's. I have DVD's of guys making shots on goats at further distances than this one, where they hit a squirrel at over 600yds...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsJ6H3ll6ms
People can do it. I'm just not betting I could.
Another one that makes claims without the courage of identifying himself / herself. Perhaps because you don't want your acquaintances to know of your big lies?
Are you retarded?
That's twice now that I said I couldn't do it. And offered proof that others can. Reading comprehension... look into it.
Ouch! Did I touch a raw nerve there? If you are going to be rude and nasty, at least have the courage to show your name! Ops, I forgot, you are anonymous coward
I don't know why people think tracking an aircraft can't be done.
I never said it could not be done. I just said that doing it in an uncontrolled environment is very different from doing it in a controlled environment. I would have the same opinion is Big Dog. had been tested indoors on a rubber floor and the touted as being in its " final steps" of testing for real life deployment.
By the way, the tracking system you saw last year was for a much larger UAV. This is a man portable UAV,is much harder to track at distances and the area of the power receiver is also much smaller.
p to solve most problems with ground clutter
Ground clutter maybe but rain, dust storms, fog, etc will disperse laser light no matter how high the aircraft is. Remember that the lase source is in the ground clutter.
I suspect the laser will be vehicle mounted,
There are many places where vehicles can not go. If you restrict the use to areas where the truck can get to the the usefulness is greatly decreased.
Park your laser on any hilltop in your control
That is a very simplistic solution to a very difficult issue. In mountainous terrain such as Afghanistan there are many ridges that block LOS. The reason to us UAVs is to see behind those ridges to find insurgents.
Anyway, they appear to be too busy overcoming the problems to realize it's impossible.
That is my whole point; they have not done anything that has not been done before and therefore have not "overcome" any problems. Instead of doing a sanitized lab test and saying they are in the "final stages" do a real world test in poor conditions and then publicize it. Then maybe I will be less skeptical.
Stabilized aiming platforms better not be a challenge for the military.
LMAO