BS...
Posted on 10/03/2014 2:36:34 PM PDT by stevie_d_64
Yep, that's definitely it. The railgun, hailed as the future of the United States Navy, sounds exactly like this. No joking here at all.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com ...
Make sure you turn up the volume for the full effect...
Useless. Just a cash cow for defense contractors.
Heh, Pretty funny! Then the real thing follows and it sounds like it is fired electromagnetically.
Patched in some starwars FX.
Metallic sound, no actual kaboom.
Good in a way, as noise represents wasted energy.
BS...
Having a lower noise level might be handy in some situations. It isn’t the kaboom that counts.
Sounds like a slestack
Gives new meaning to the phrase “silent but deadly”!
“Having a lower noise level might be handy in some situations. It isn’t the kaboom that counts.”
Anything that kicks a large projectile out the muzzle at Mach 6 or so (6600 FPS roughly) is going to make a lot of noise!
Just the sonic boom from the projectile would be impressive.
Inert projectiles and inert propellant, no elaborate armored weapons elevators and no magazines to blow up are not “useless.”
It would be a cracking sound, like a whip.
I don’t know what voltages this needs. The gunner could get a nasty shock or electrocuted if there is an insulation failure.
But this might not be too hard to automate.
With a Mach 6 muzzle velocity, that is a heck of a lot of kinetic energy!
1.Huge wonking generators/monster capacitors to gin up and store the megawattage required to launch the projectiles. Not ideal in vessel operating in a saltwater environment/could be punctured by the enemy. Which has been known to happen.
2. Ultrahigh velocity projectiles of indifferent accuracy. Ultrahigh velocities in air at sea level equals gigantic air friction/heating and projectile degradation. Think "meteorite". That's why there is all that flame in the videos.
3. High air friction loads equal high drag loads, so the projectile loses velocity very rapidly when fired against a flat trajectory target (such as another ship on the horizon). Firing at long distance against indirect targets equals throwing a cannon-projectile-sized weight at the target but without the explosive fill. By the time the projectile reaches its maximum ordinate (apogee) it will have retained only a portion of its initial velocity and it will be driven primarily by gravity. Think "thrown brick".
4. No explosive fill and no fuze and no guidance because none of those components can survive the high launch accelerations/electromagnetic pulse at launch.
5. No guidance means near uselessness at any significant range from the launch platform. For those new to the art of ballistics, errors increase with range and there are many, many sources of error. With only a slight chance of the initial firing direction/elevation being within a mil or so, the further the projectile flies, the more inconsistencies in projectile weight, initial velocity, wind direction(s), coreolis effect, etc. will play hob with actually hitting what was aimed at.
6.Remember that EMP at launch? Huge RF signature which will be interesting with the shipboard electronics and will give the entire planet the firing platform's location when the trigger is pulled.
We can add launch rail erosion issues to the pile, but you get the picture by now, I hope.
BAE Systems and a host of parasitic contractors are deeply thankful for all that defense funding and gosh, those great videos help the Navy look all modern and such - but I am saddened that we haven't chased down better solutions than this turkey for long-distance fire support.
That’s the way it works in the Oligarchy. We the serfs get up everyday, go to work and pay taxes, the inner city welfare slaves get up everyday, go buy stuff, paying taxes, the taxes are used by the Oligarchy to make the rich richer and the serfs and inner city welfare slaves poorer.
Trajectory issues can’t be any worse than a mortar or other non rocket powered projectile gun. But there is no reason why there could not be a hybrid projectile with the capability of in flight guidance.
But I’d ultimately like to know how much kill power one of its bullets has. Mach 6 could make up for a multitude of other sins. Just ask Tunguska.
Wrong. Mortar and cannon projectiles can be guided. They are also much easier to fire at consistent velocities and the aiming platforms are easily capable of one mil precision. Never spent any time in artillery or naval gunfire, have you?
"But there is no reason why there could not be a hybrid projectile with the capability of in flight guidance."
Wrong again. The extreme launch accelerations coupled with the heating and electromagnetic pulse make "hybrid projectiles" impossible for any foreseeable future.
"Just ask Tunguska."
The Tunguska meteorite exploded when it hit the atmosphere.
You should look at changing your pen name.
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.