Skip to comments.
The U.S. Navy Rides the Rail
American Thinker ^
| April 6, 2013
| Brendon S. Peck
Posted on 04/07/2013 12:05:19 PM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-146 last
To: Chainmail
Guidance gets easier. Once you've punched through the lower atmosphere you are no longer trying to peer through a white hot fireball to look out. Further you are looking for a 'sore thumb' warm target against a 3 Kelvin background.
Maneuvering could be done by vectored venting of the boiling liquid used to cool the electronics, maybe?
Or perhaps the self-same boiling liquid could be used to rupture the shell and populate a satellite's path with a cloud of BBs? Well, squashed BBs anyway...
141
posted on
04/08/2013 11:34:52 AM PDT
by
null and void
(Gun confiscation enables tyranny. Republicans create the tools of oppression and Democrats use them.)
To: Chainmail
I read “From the Earth to the Moon” once...
142
posted on
04/08/2013 12:01:07 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Gun confiscation enables tyranny. Republicans create the tools of oppression and Democrats use them.)
To: null and void
All great points and some great ideas. Maybe when this set of project leaders get disheartened we can take over..
Just like the HARP project, maybe this could be used for low-cost satellite launching too...
143
posted on
04/08/2013 12:46:56 PM PDT
by
Chainmail
(A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
To: Delta Dawn
144
posted on
04/09/2013 4:54:36 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)
Ah, finally someone can answer the question. :-)
(I know this thread died a while back, but I've been indisposed for a couple of weeks).
Frankly, I was never worried about the recoil. But, my original post started as a reply to someone that simply claimed the recoil was approximately the same, with no supporting data. You've provided it.
However, what I really wanted to know was the difference at the target. There's no explosive (at least currently) in the railgun projectile, and it relies solely on kinetic energy. How does that compare to the combined kinetic and explosive energy of a conventional round? Without that adjustment factor, you can't compare anything directly: recoil, cost, etc.
However, you have explained it better than anyone, so far. Thanks!
145
posted on
04/19/2013 6:33:25 AM PDT
by
justlurking
(tagline removed, as demanded by Admin Moderator)
To: Paladin2
It doesn't seem to fulfill the definition of a firearm. Maybe they should use the word accelerate instead of fire. That's an interesting point.
In my state, a firearm is specifically defined as one that uses a burning propellent to propel a projectile.
Therefore, a potato gun that uses compressed air is legal. One that uses hairspray is considered an illegal firearm.
Therefore, a miniature railgun would not be a firearm.
146
posted on
04/19/2013 6:36:58 AM PDT
by
justlurking
(tagline removed, as demanded by Admin Moderator)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-146 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson