• geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      That’s why there are shells which explode at a certain distance. But yes the general issue here is range. Shotguns are close range and cheap. Lasers are close range and expensive.

      • freagle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        But the ammunition is the real cost. Not only to produce but to package, about ship, store, and carry. A boat can only store so much shotgun ammo, but a boat with a fusion reactor has infinite laser ammo

        • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          Munition isn’t actually that expensive. As long as the munition is (a lot) cheaper than the drone, the math checks out.

          Now let me tell you about the cost to build a giant laser with a limited range…

          • freagle@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            11 hours ago

            No no I understand that building the platform is expensive. That’s not in question. What’s in question is whether an expensive platform with very low price per shot eventually makes up for the platform cost.

            Likely it is intended to be used in concert with ballistics, not instead of. Laser have a very low peak rate of fire relative to ballistics, but have a very high duration of continuous field service relative to ballistics

            • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 hours ago

              Not to mention lasers move at the speed of light. That’s got to be a benefit, right? Is there no benefit realized from the boost there?

              • freagle@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 hours ago

                I think there is benefit there but not from a time-to-kill (since the laser kills via heat accumulation which takes some measurable time) but rather that it can be more responsive to evasive maneuvers from the target