graylion said:

So, talk to Thales and get an integrated system with 40mm CTA and 8 missile launchers that can take StarStreak (and possibly Martlet). That turret would probably weigh more than 2.5t, but should fit on most wheeled and tracked APV/IFV chassis?

That sounds like a reasonable approach

TonyDiG said:

The 35mm Millennium system is said to be able to engage Fighter aircraft/attack helicopters at 3,500 m ("Keep-out range"). It could probably handle a slow-moving target like a drone out a bit further.

I agree.

At one point you skip ever larger gun and move to affordable counter drone munitions like Coyote 2 for larger drones like shahed , and smalled electrically driven drones for taking down small quadcopters 

Somewhat crude design , basicaly off the shelf model jet engine hurling along a crude lifting body missile.

Iranian loitering 358 missile 

In addition to guns and missiles, we're apparently right on the cusp of having effective laser weapons, with 50kw armed Strykers deploying next month.

That would be an irony that right as drones make SPAA anti air cannon relevant again, lasers arrive to make them obsolete again.

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2022/12/07/us-army-laser-stryker/

Reportedly, the system is powerful enough to not just defeat small drones, but also incoming Mortar shells, which are fairly sturdy.

I'm curious whether this laser or others are capable of hitting drones at higher altitudes, or whether the distance/atmosphere/clouds dilutes the beam to the point of no longer being effective? 

DEWs performance is definitely affected by atmospheric conditions. Definitely wouldn't want one to be your only defense in an area that gets foggy.

Farmplinker said:

DEWs performance is definitely affected by atmospheric conditions. Definitely wouldn't want one to be your only defense in an area that gets foggy

Nice, so theres still hope for MAAAGA - Make Anti Aircraft Artillery Great Again.

A future ruled by lasers would be pretty boring. 

gatnerd said:

Reportedly, the system is powerful enough to not just defeat small drones, but also incoming Mortar shells, which are fairly sturdy.

This is possible for quite some time now.
BUT against sturdier targets like mortar or artillery shells or large aircraft lasers are currently very ineffective. They can shoot them down but it takes time. In some cases the target needs to be laserd for seconds for any effect on its structure. Lasers currently can engage mortar shells but only a few. Its very easy to saturate them. Which is not the case with gun based systems which only need one good hit and cycle much faster.
Lasers are intresting for being effectively silent, invisible and with very low risk of colateral damage. Which is why they are currently deployed as (drone) defense in civillian settings. Like large scale sports events.

In a military context especially against massive attacks guns are much more effective.

Things like sevice and maintability and suceptability to atmospheric conditions are on top.

gatnerd said:

I'm curious whether this laser or others are capable of hitting drones at higher altitudes, or whether the distance/atmosphere/clouds dilutes the beam to the point of no longer being effective? 

They can hit at excessive distances. Like in lower orbit or the moon. It really depends on how you define hit though. It is possible to prove the presence of laser light on the moon with modern detectors if even a small weapons grade laser is pointed at it. The energy density will be very low though.
The focus distance is a huge problem. THis limits the effective range even if the athmospheric conditions are perfect. Clouds are not the biggest problem BTW. These are usually up high. Atmospheric polution is a huge problem for use in urban areas. As is dust. Ironically both are pretty common a lot of the predicted future theatres.

Its also currently very easy to protect a drone or missile against laser attacks. To a degree where it takes so long to get an effect that the missile will reach the emiter itself. This lowers the number required for a saturation attack to a low one digit number.

In the long term the potential benefits of DEW could be huge. But this will take more time to fully mature the systems and get the power out up by a factor of 10 to 100.

schnuersi said:

Its also currently very easy to protect a drone or missile against laser attacks. To a degree where it takes so long to get an effect that the missile will reach the emiter itself. This lowers the number required for a saturation attack to a low one digit number

Does that apply for these smaller drones like the shaeed 136 etc drones?

One potential option for drone defense is converting older SPG's like the Paladin into AAA. 

This was done a few years ago with BAE's HVP guided projectile:

The HVP was fired from a Paladin, and used to shoot down a Cruise Missile:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a33971111/us-army-howitzer-shoots-down-simulated-missile/

Cost is likely a factor for those.

Perhaps a AHEAD or proximity airburst 155mm shell would also be an option?

gatnerd said:

Does that apply for these smaller drones like the shaeed 136 etc drones?

I would categorise the shaeed 136 as a larger drone ;)

And yes it especially applies for this size and application.