OPINION | Directed Energy Is Moving Toward Deployment. The Optical Supply Chain Has to Keep Up

Directed energy is finally moving from demonstration to real-world deployment.

In May 2026, Joint Interagency Task Force 401 selected five U.S. military installations for a directed-energy counter-drone pilot program. In the UK, DragonFire is expected to enter Royal Navy service starting in 2027 under a £316 million contract.

Both programs are responding to the same challenge. Cheap, widely available drones have changed the economics of air defense. Lasers offer a low cost per shot, a magazine that does not run dry, and engagement speeds that missiles cannot match.

Deployment, however, changes what it means for a system to work.

Proving that a laser can defeat a drone under controlled conditions is one thing. The greater challenge is determining whether the complete system can continue doing so after months of transport, vibration, harsh weather, prolonged exposure, and field maintenance. At that point, optics are no longer a minor component consideration. They become a readiness issue.

The laser source generates the beam. The optical path determines whether that beam remains stable, focused, and effective by the time it reaches the target.

Kilowatts Are Only Part of the Story

Directed-energy systems are often judged by their power rating. Kilowatts matter, but they do not reveal how much usable energy actually reaches the target.

Before leaving the system, the beam passes through mirrors, coatings, beam directors, windows, combiners, and protective optical elements. Every one of these components must preserve beam quality under high power, repeatedly and across multiple engagements.

At directed-energy power levels, even small losses matter. Trace absorption within an optical coating generates heat. That heat can distort the optic, alter the wavefront, and spread the focal spot.

Nothing necessarily breaks. The laser still fires, and the system may appear to be operating normally. It simply delivers less useful energy to the target.

Against a small, fast-moving drone, that loss of performance can make the difference between a successful engagement and a miss.

The Field Environment Is the Real Test

These systems will not operate under laboratory conditions. Every deployment environment places different demands on the optics.

A fixed-site counter-drone system may remain outdoors for months. A naval system must withstand salt air, moisture, and constant vibration. Mobile systems add dust, shock, and maintenance performed under difficult conditions. Airborne systems also face pressure changes, temperature cycling, and strict size, weight, and power constraints.

This is already a recognized concern. In 2025, Col. Adam Miller, who leads directed-energy programs within the U.S. Army's Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, said:

"The optics on these systems are one of the high failure rate items and one of the challenges that we have."

That observation highlights an important issue for defense buyers, integrators, and suppliers. A laser weapon does not have to fail completely to lose operational value.

A gradual decline in beam quality or transmission may be enough. The same is true for optics that require frequent maintenance or are difficult to clean and replace in the field. The weapon may technically continue to operate, but engagements become slower, shorter, or less reliable. Eventually, crews can no longer depend on it.

Specifications Need to Match the Mission

Many optical reliability problems begin before manufacturing. Specifications often describe laboratory conditions rather than the environment in which the system will actually operate.

Wavelength and reflectivity are almost always defined. For directed-energy applications, that is not enough. In practice, defining high-power laser optics requires considering LIDT, absorption, pulse regime, beam diameter, and duty cycle together.

A supplier also needs to understand the beam diameter, angle of incidence, polarization, average and peak power density, duty cycle, thermal load, contamination risk, cleaning method, environmental exposure, and repeatability requirements. Each factor affects what the coating must withstand.

Laser-induced damage threshold, or LIDT, is a good example. It is sometimes treated as a simple pass-or-fail safety metric. In reality, the measured result depends on wavelength, pulse duration, beam size, pulse count, and test method.

If the test conditions do not reflect the real system, the number on the datasheet may have limited value. The same applies to absorption. Heating effects may only become apparent under representative power levels and duty cycles. A brief bench test may never reveal them.

These may sound like component-level details, but they create risk across the broader program. Once a system has been integrated into a ship, vehicle, aircraft, or base defense installation, redesigning the optics becomes expensive. It can delay qualification, complicate sustainment, and reduce confidence in operational readiness.

The Supply Chain Has to Scale

A successful prototype proves that the physics works. A deployable capability requires much more than that.

The supply chain must be able to produce mirrors, windows, coatings, beam combiners, and protective optics to a consistent standard. It must do so across multiple production batches while maintaining the quality required for sustained high-power operation.

Sustainment, therefore, needs to be considered at the beginning of procurement, not after the system has already been installed on a platform.

Before committing to a supplier, defense teams need to understand how the optics perform under realistic duty cycles. They need to know how coatings respond to heat and contamination, how often components can be cleaned or replaced in the field, and whether replacement optics will perform the same way as the originals.

Directed energy has gained momentum because the operational need is real. Low-cost drones have forced militaries to rethink the economics of air defense.

The next challenge is no longer proving that laser weapons can work. It is proving that they can continue working once they leave the test range.

Laser power generates the beam. Optical reliability determines whether that beam remains effective when it is needed most.

---

About the Author

Martynas Adomaitis is the Defense and Space Development Manager at OPTOMAN, where he works on advanced optical solutions for aerospace and defense applications. He holds a Master’s degree in Physics and Optical Physics from Vilnius University and specializes in laser optics, ion beam sputtering coatings, and high-performance laser optics.

Disclaimer: This article represents the author’s independent analysis and perspective based on publicly available information. It does not constitute official guidance, intelligence assessment, or policy recommendation, and does not reflect the positions of Access Hub or any affiliated entities.