Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: New Navy Rail Gun?

  1. #1
    Defense Professional RustyBattleship's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 06
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    6,042

    New Navy Rail Gun?

    Oh really? And where does all that smoke and flame come from? And is that an oversize LEGO they are shooting?

    Navy Working on New Super Rail Gun
    Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

  2. #2
    In Memoriam/Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,434
    Quote Originally Posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    Oh really? And where does all that smoke and flame come from? And is that an oversize LEGO they are shooting?

    Navy Working on New Super Rail Gun
    I believe the flames and smoke are from the rails being ablated into useless junk, while a single shot is impressive - what next when the gun has self destructed - they have a long way to go on weaponizing this thing.
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

  3. #3
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728
    Hmmm with a stand off range of an appoximate 110 miles, IMO well worth pursuing for the future of naval warfare. If they can mount it on a ship by 2020-2025 can you imagine the other protos they must also be dreaming up. Hows about one mounted on an M1 Abrams tank.
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

  4. #4
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    5,349
    Quote Originally Posted by USSWisconsin View Post
    I believe the flames and smoke are from the rails being ablated into useless junk, while a single shot is impressive - what next when the gun has self destructed - they have a long way to go on weaponizing this thing.
    And also way too many parts or moving parts should I say. The concept of a railgun was that it would be a simple weapon with no propellants needed. But it just takes too much complexity to justify the expenses of fielding the weapon in battle. A better concept would be the Metal Storm. That way you can launch multiple shells at a high rate of fire. As for the long distance, you got planes capable of dropping 2,000 lbs from a distance and is much more reliable. So why the need for a railgun?

  5. #5
    Defense Professional RustyBattleship's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 06
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    6,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster View Post
    And also way too many parts or moving parts should I say. The concept of a railgun was that it would be a simple weapon with no propellants needed. But it just takes too much complexity to justify the expenses of fielding the weapon in battle. A better concept would be the Metal Storm. That way you can launch multiple shells at a high rate of fire. As for the long distance, you got planes capable of dropping 2,000 lbs from a distance and is much more reliable. So why the need for a railgun?
    Good points. The projectile looked no larger then a 2X2 "slug" brick. What good would a brick (regardless of material or ultra-high speed) be in striking a major sized target.

    Hmmmm. Just thought of something. I don't think there is any noticable recoil in a rail gun. But if there is little or none it would make a great meteor buster on future long range (Mars?) space ships.

    Spock: "Bridge. There is a 20 meter diameter asteroid incoming on a collison course."

    Kirk: "Sulu, can we change course to miss the asteroid"

    Sulu: "Not recommended Sir. A course change would direct us into a larger field of smaller asteroids."

    Kirk: "Chekov, prepare to fire phasers."

    Chekov: "Sorry Sir. Phasers are off for scheduled maintenance."

    Kirk: "Uhura. Locate Commaner Scott. I think we left him on the Yamato for inspection".

    Uhura: "I have communication with Commander Scott."

    Scott: "Captain. Tell T'Pol to push the the yellow switch underneath Ryker's console to activate the Rail Gun. Data will program in the coordinates. Then tell La Forge to flip the red switch underneath 7 of 9's bed to launch the brick basteroid buster. Janeway will track and record the efficiency of the hit."

  6. #6
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    5,349
    I am sure that the last sentence is a recurring theme in your dreams/fantasies.

  7. #7
    Regular
    Join Date
    09 Nov 07
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    Hmmmm. Just thought of something. I don't think there is any noticable recoil in a rail gun. But if there is little or none it would make a great meteor buster on future long range (Mars?) space ships.
    Unfortunately the laws of physics dictate otherwise. There must be recoil, and I would imagine a weaponized version of a rail gun would have quite a bit of it. Despite the fact that the projectile isnt physically touching the barrel, there is still the magnetic force. No way around that.

  8. #8
    New Member
    Join Date
    04 Jul 05
    Posts
    12
    The projectile has 32 Mj of kinetic energy to transfer to the target. In the tests despite the plastic brick it was still able to blast through a steel panel. IIRC a 120mm tank projectile has about 20 Mj. I heard they are working on a tungsten dart projectile. The AGS will become the standard naval heavy gun until probably 2030 or so before the railgun is ready to be deployed. Unless they come across a deposit of Naqahdah.

  9. #9
    Defense Professional RustyBattleship's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 06
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    6,042
    Naqahdah?
    Isn't that a by-product of depleted Dilithium Crystals?
    Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

  10. #10
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,986
    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaNZ View Post
    The projectile has 32 Mj of kinetic energy to transfer to the target. In the tests despite the plastic brick it was still able to blast through a steel panel. IIRC a 120mm tank projectile has about 20 Mj. I heard they are working on a tungsten dart projectile. The AGS will become the standard naval heavy gun until probably 2030 or so before the railgun is ready to be deployed. Unless they come across a deposit of Naqahdah.
    The M829A3 gets close to 13MJ not 20.

    BM,

    you got planes capable of dropping 2,000 lbs from a distance and is much more reliable. So why the need for a railgun?
    As weapons, sensors and senor-fusion technology advance planes are going to become increasingly expensive and less able to survive. A rail gun/mass driver offers the chance to deliver a lot of energy on target for low cost.

  11. #11
    In Memoriam/Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,434
    Quote Originally Posted by eocoolj View Post
    Unfortunately the laws of physics dictate otherwise. There must be recoil, and I would imagine a weaponized version of a rail gun would have quite a bit of it. Despite the fact that the projectile isnt physically touching the barrel, there is still the magnetic force. No way around that.
    Recoil would be tranfered to the gun by inductive reverse EMF, at those energy levels the impulse would be very destructive to the mount. Without significant advances in materials, missiles would be more cost effective. A long steady impulse from a rocket moter would probably be much cheaper to accomplish with existing technology than a sudden jerk putting all that energy into the projo over the length of the rail. Perhaps they will build a very long ship with a 300 meter rail? Nuclear powered battleship any one?
    Last edited by USSWisconsin; 19 Dec 10, at 05:11.
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

  12. #12
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    294
    I believe all the smoke and flame is from the air being superheated as the projectile goes through it. Think SR-71 and surface temps and multiply by 25.

    I think there is some form of plasma in there to...

  13. #13
    In Memoriam/Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,434
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Boat View Post
    I believe all the smoke and flame is from the air being superheated as the projectile goes through it. Think SR-71 and surface temps and multiply by 25.

    I think there is some form of plasma in there to...
    I beleive you are correct, some of it is air plasma, which is orange and metal plasma which depends on the metal - iron plasma can be yellow, even a 5 eV plasma is incredibly hot for solid state materials - the local ion density - between the rails and projo would be very high - possibly 10^22 +
    Last edited by USSWisconsin; 19 Dec 10, at 15:38.
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

  14. #14
    Contributor
    Join Date
    26 Mar 09
    Posts
    517
    If I recall correctly, an Iowa's main gun would dwarf this railgun projected goals. Possibly having several times the energy per shot...

  15. #15
    In Memoriam/Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,434
    Quote Originally Posted by cr9527 View Post
    If I recall correctly, an Iowa's main gun would dwarf this railgun projected goals. Possibly having several times the energy per shot...
    In every way except the range
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. GE and CSR Invest $50 Million in Fast Rail in the US
    By xinhui in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 18 Dec 10,, 21:17
  2. VLS cells vs rail-launch systems
    By HoratioNelson in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 25 Dec 09,, 13:19
  3. New rail traderoutes
    By cyppok in forum International Economy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04 Sep 09,, 02:58
  4. Powered Picatinny-rail
    By usgn in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12 Oct 08,, 16:15
  5. Hiawatha Light Rail Transit Line
    By Ironduke in forum Science & Technology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10 Mar 05,, 14:48

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •