Actually it looks like there are big problems with it, and the Navy should probably kill the program. Somebody with a high rank must be in love with the idea...
Looking to get some information to give an informed answer I ran across this:
http://www.g2mil.com/rail_gun_fraud.htm
It makes quite a few great points, which follow from basic physics and engineering:
- The projectiles are small, inert, and effectively are armor piercing. They will probably just punch through the target ship without doing much damage in most cases, and will not have much blast effect against troops.
- It seems likely they'll lose too much speed when used as direct fires over more than a few hundred yards.
- Any kind of guidance is highly problematic, making hits against any kind of moving target with indirect fire pretty well impossible.
- Rail guns are advertised as good against aircraft, but they're actually poor.
It seems the current tech is too low velocity, and the problem is even if you get higher velocities air resistance increases as the square of velocity. That means velocity falls off faster the faster you push a projectile. It also means you get drastically more heating the faster you push a projectile. Rail erosion is already a problem, and will get much worse with higher velocities.
All in all, it's probably good that China is wasting its time with railguns... ;-)
As a closing thought, "The Rail Gun Fallacy" did have a suggested replacement that sounds pretty good to me:
The answer to the US Navy's needs can be found in the past. The Navy developed and successfully tested the rapid fire MK-71 8-inch naval gun in the 1970s. (pictured). This can provide three times more firepower with twice the range of today's 5-inch guns that deliver just 70lb projectiles. Proven 8-inch rounds can be fitted with GPS guidance or laser spot sensors that were developed for 5-inch rounds. An 8-inch projectile is far more cost effective since it can use the same expensive guidance as a 5-inch round, yet deliver four times more explosive since the projectile is much larger so the guidance system is a smaller percentage of the payload.This would provide a huge leap forward, although its low-cost will disappoint those who profit from perpetual weapons development projects. The Navy determined the MK-71 could easily fit on Arleigh Burke class destroyers that are still under construction. During the Vietnam war, US Navy ships fired 8-inch "super heavy" 335lb projectiles out to 18 miles and 112lb LLRB "arrow" projectiles at Mach 3.5 out to 41 miles! The MK-71 gun may not excite armchair dreamers, but its basic 260lb 8-inch round can deliver four times the explosive power two times farther than current 5-inch guns or railguns.
I wonder how receptive President Trump would be to saving a bunch of money and having a more effective Navy...