India working on laser weapons

[Quick MIK]

Hyderabad, Nov 24 (IANS) India is doing a lot of work on laser weapons, particularly at the technology level, said a top defence scientist.

'We are trying to see how to produce high power lasers, how to get that kind of narrow beam, how to get miniaturized version of laser power device,' said V.K. Saraswat, scientific advisor to the defence minister.

He, however, said India need to graduate from physics portion to the actual portion of engineering and development.

Saraswat, who is also the Director General of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), was talking to reporters on the sidelines of 22nd annual conference of Indian Nuclear Society here Thursday evening.

He said DRDO, Atomic Energy and academic institutions like Plasma Research Laboratory and National Physical Laboratory were working together on the physics of laser.

The top scientist said while some air borne laser systems and some mobile systems were developed, a lot required to be done in terms of weapons system.

'It is a complex subject with science getting into engineering, engineering getting into technology and technology getting into product. You have to go through that cycle because nobody is going to help you in this aspect. Our own academicians, scientists and engineers have to work together,' he said.


India working on laser weapons -  

 

[Marxist]

Indian defence scientists are in the process of developing futuristic high power laser weapons, e-bombs as powerful as 1,000 lightning strikes, and computers that can be worn by soldiers.

India developing high power e-bomb, laser gun | Deccan Chronicle

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I think the sharp distinction made in India between what is "science" and what is "engineering" is extremely bad for technological development. In my own field, pharmaceuticals, the "science" and "engineering" are intricately intertwined. It is the same for lasers. Only in very old things like automobiles is the "science" distinct from the "engineering". After all, you do not need to know statistical thermodynamics to design a diesel engine.

 

[Hulk]

Can we first have something before we start talking.

 

[Quick MIK]

Can we first have something before we start talking.

Talking is easier than working.

 

[Vibs]

I think the sharp distinction made in India between what is "science" and what is "engineering" is extremely bad for technological development. In my own field, pharmaceuticals, the "science" and "engineering" are intricately intertwined. It is the same for lasers. Only in very old things like automobiles is the "science" distinct from the "engineering". After all, you do not need to know statistical thermodynamics to design a diesel engine.

I actually agree with you on that. Theory cannot stand alone without the practical aspect of it. Physicists (or other pure science professionals) and Engineers have to be part of the core group simultaneously working out a solution. Not one after the other.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I actually agree with you on that. Theory cannot stand alone without the practical aspect of it. Physicists (or other pure science professionals) and Engineers have to be part of the core group simultaneously working out a solution. Not one after the other.

For a car, it might not be so important, but for high tech applications, theory and basic experimentation is tied with the engineering. You can't design and improve a laser without strong knowledge of optics, statistical thermodynamics, materials science, etc. which are all basic knowledge from physics and chemistry.

Actually, from what I've seen, the management of a scientific project is just as important as the actual science and engineering behind it. With bad management, even the best scientists won't be able to do anything.

 

[drunken-monke]

I think the sharp distinction made in India between what is "science" and what is "engineering" is extremely bad for technological development. In my own field, pharmaceuticals, the "science" and "engineering" are intricately intertwined. It is the same for lasers. Only in very old things like automobiles is the "science" distinct from the "engineering". After all, you do not need to know statistical thermodynamics to design a diesel engine.

I agree with you over your statement.. I am from the same field of Pharmaceuticals...

 

[Jason bourne]

i think he is talking abt KALI not e bomb

 

[Vibs]

For a car, it might not be so important, but for high tech applications, theory and basic experimentation is tied with the engineering. You can't design and improve a laser without strong knowledge of optics, statistical thermodynamics, materials science, etc. which are all basic knowledge from physics and chemistry.

Actually, from what I've seen, the management of a scientific project is just as important as the actual science and engineering behind it. With bad management, even the best scientists won't be able to do anything.

Adding to your point, Pure science professionals will use techniques and equipment already in existence to test practical applications. But will be unaware of other options or modifications that could make the project feasible or easier. Thats where engineers have to work closely with such scientists and have the project pick up pace.