Beams instead of missiles Trump wants to keep Iran in check with lasers - how realistic is that?

Lasers are seen as the military technology of the future, and Donald Trump also wants to use them in the Iran war to save money. But how realistic is self-defense using beams instead of missiles?

Donald Trump is once again enthusiastic. "The laser technology we now have is incredible," he enthused to the press. By using this very technology, the US President wants to get the high financial costs of his war against Iran under control.

Specifically, lasers are to replace missile defense systems such as the MIM-104 Patriot. On paper, this really reads like a decision that practically makes itself: according to some experts, the cost per laser launch could be as low as 3.50 US dollars.

War has already cost more than 11 billion dollars

In comparison: the interceptor missiles of the Patriot defense system alone can cost up to 3 million US dollars. This also puts the USA in an awkward position in terms of financing the war: if all costs are taken into account, according to one drone manufacturer, it costs the USA 60 to 70 times as much to intercept drones as it costs Iran to deploy them.

Attack on IranTrump announces new talks - and threatens once again +++ Panic in the Strait of Hormuz

The Pentagon itself puts the cost of the war to date at more than 11.3 billion US dollars since it began on February 28. It can be assumed that the actual costs will even exceed this figure.

However, the math of switching to laser technology is not as simple as it seems at first glance. The cost of individual shots may be very limited, but the systems required for this are all the more expensive.

Expert: "It's not like 'Star Trek'"

The company nLight recently supplied the army with a system that can produce lasers with a power of 70 kilowatts. Cost: 35 million dollars. This does not include the cost of maintenance. It also remains to be seen how well the technology will withstand the external conditions in its areas of use.

The launch practice also has its disadvantages. "It's not like 'Star Trek', where the target explodes immediately," one expert told the New York Times.

Real lasers have to hit their target for longer. Their effectiveness also depends heavily on the conditions on site. If it is cloudy, a laser should be able to aim at a target for three seconds or even longer. Generally speaking, the technology is very effective under the right conditions. However, if the conditions are less ideal, its practical benefits quickly diminish.

China and Israel are also experimenting

This is because shooting down a laser is somewhat more complicated than shooting down a missile. To take out a drone, a laser weapon concentrates enormous amounts of light on its weak points until its components melt. Lasers can also be dangerous for the surrounding area: If one hits an airplane, for example, its pilot could be put out of action.

This danger was illustrated in an absurd way in El Paso in February. There, the border patrol used lasers against a suspected drone belonging to a drug cartel - which turned out to be a party balloon. This in turn led to security concerns - and a temporary closure of airspace.

Nevertheless, the progress and further development of laser technology for military use will be virtually unstoppable. In addition to the USA, China and Israel have already begun experimenting with it.