Ian wrote:

"Dweezil Dwarftosser" wrote in message
...
George wrote:

The US is looking at putting a 100kW laser on the JSF. Does anyone
think this could supplant the gun? It is precise, effective (when they
get its power up), aimable (including well off boresight), has a
longer range than a gun, doesn't require ammo, and if you aim it up,
you don't have to worry about shells splashing at the wrong place.

Cool... if (and only if):

- the laser has the same optical path as the video-
aiming device. (May be slaved to radar aim point,
but it is essential the trigger-puller be able to
SEE the effectiveness of the aim/shot).
- all battles are over a sunny, clear desert.
- there is no smoke from previous targets, ground or air.
- There is no "Interlocks out" switch in the cockpit, so
the pilot cannot short-cuircuit the mandatory charge time.
(prevents him from firing "blanks"...)

From what I've read, I'd say it is viable to do this, but questions have
been asked about the "recharge" time for the laser?

While lasers could be cool, I have doubts about effectiveness,
especially once they become operational, as ablatives and other
protections/countermeasures could reduce them to little more than
over-built flashlights.
I suspect a lot of talk about no need for guns/BVR missile environments
assumes a US style total air superiority situation with everything
working just like the advertisements claim. And those aircraft tasked
for that kind of air superiority role may well not need guns. However,
for everyone else in less than ideal situations, having a gun option
would seem prudent, especially for multi-role machines that end up being
in inventory for a few decades longer than expected, fighting wars in
places/circumstances that their designers never dreamed of.