The recent incidents involving U.S. Navy warships shooting down Houthi drones and rockets have raised questions about the weaponry being used. It seems that the guns and missiles employed by the Navy are far more expensive than the threats they are countering. Interestingly, the next-generation directed-energy weapons, which the military has been developing for years, have been notably absent from these operations. A recent report from the Congressional Research Service sheds light on this issue and provides some insights into the Navy’s decision-making process.
Despite the relatively low-cost nature of the Houthi drones, which are often of Iranian origin and can be acquired for a few thousand dollars, the Navy has not faced significant difficulties in neutralizing them. However, concerns have arisen regarding the use of expensive interceptor missiles, priced at around $11 million each, to take down these relatively inexpensive drones. This price disparity has prompted the military to explore alternative solutions, such as lasers and other directed-energy weapons.
Directed-energy weapons offer several advantages over traditional guns and missiles. One of the key benefits is their cost-effectiveness. These weapons promise a cheap and virtually unlimited supply of ammunition, allowing for the interception of drones in large numbers. The United States has already made progress in deploying lasers aboard ships, with the USS Ponce being the first to do so in 2014.
So why haven’t these directed-energy weapons become the go-to solution for countering Houthi drones? The Congressional Research Service report suggests that there are several factors at play. First and foremost is the issue of scalability. While lasers have proven effective in certain scenarios, they still face limitations when it comes to engaging multiple targets simultaneously. This is particularly relevant in the case of Houthi drone attacks, where drones are often launched in large numbers. The Navy needs a solution that can handle such swarms effectively.
Another factor to consider is the maturity of the technology. While lasers have shown promise, they are still in the early stages of development and deployment. The Navy is cautious about relying solely on a technology that has not yet been fully tested and proven in combat situations. This cautious approach is understandable, given the critical nature of the Navy’s operations and the need for reliable and effective defense systems.
Additionally, there are logistical challenges associated with integrating directed-energy weapons into existing naval platforms. Retrofitting ships with these new systems requires careful planning and consideration. It is not a simple task and requires significant investment and time. The Navy needs to ensure that any new technology can seamlessly integrate with their existing arsenal without compromising the overall effectiveness of the fleet.
While directed-energy weapons hold great potential for countering the threat of Houthi drones, it is clear that there are still hurdles to overcome before they become the primary solution. The Navy’s decision to continue using traditional guns and missiles, despite their higher cost, is a pragmatic one. It ensures that they have a reliable and proven means of defense while they continue to refine and develop the next-generation directed-energy weapons.
In conclusion, the absence of directed-energy weapons in the recent incidents involving U.S. Navy warships is not due to a lack of interest or effort. The Navy is actively exploring these technologies and has already made progress in deploying lasers aboard ships. However, there are still challenges to overcome, including scalability, technology maturity, and logistical considerations. As the development of directed-energy weapons progresses, we can expect to see them play a more prominent role in countering future threats, including those posed by Houthi drones.
