Posted on 03/27/2017 8:55:09 PM PDT by MtnClimber
he US Navy recently released footage of its first testfire of an electromagnetic railgun at their new terminal at Office of Naval Research and Naval Surface Warfare Center.
Railguns use 20 to 32 mega joules of electromagnetic energy to fire projectiles at seven to nine times the speed of sound, according to a Congressional Research Service report on the weapons.
Because they fire with electricity alone — not chemical explosives like conventional ammunition — railguns can potentially operate much cheaper and fire much much faster than weapons currently used by the Navy.
The Navy has long sought the technology as a potential game-changer for surface warfare, as China, Russia, and the US all race towards building hypersonic weapons that no ship can currently defend against. The newest classes of Navy ships, like the Zumwalt and Ford carriers, have been planned with outsized power generators in anticipation of the revolutionary weapon.
Despite looking like a typical cannon blast, the railgun only emits fire and sparks from metal components that become molten during the firing process that forces the components to fire at mind boggling speeds.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
That is some serious velocity. Interesting that the slow motion film showed that the projectile seems to have a flat nose profile.
Its all about surveillance. Given modern technology of all sorts, once a ship is located, it can be sunk in a variety of ways. Sorry Navy, but the era of big capital surface ships is over, Simply not ethical to deploy five thousand young sailors on a big carrier in an operational area against a technologically capable opponent.
How many pregnant women were on board?
Site wants me to turn off my addblocker or I can’t continue?
Screw them.
The future of warfare is swarm bots and it scares the crap out of me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1t4M2XnIhI
That was an interesting video. Looks like in the video in my post the sabot has not been shed from the projectile yet.
Do these have warheads or are they just kinetic energy devices?
CC
Government and Defense contractors? Not a chance.
Backyard field test 250 lbs. railgun 27,000 joules
250lbs. railgun versus car door 27,000 joules
250 lbs. railgun confirmed lethality ballistics gel test
World's first railgun tank 35,000 joules; let's make a cake
What should scare people is the inherent problem of how leadership in any top heavy organization such as the Navy is developed. Those who excelled and perfected the technologies and policies of a previous generation and time rise up to lead the current organization. Their thinking, habits and values are molded by the successful experiences they had in their prime. Many do not adapt. They are “battleship admirals’. Can a flag officer who defined his career as an expert pilot and captain of a supercarrier really accept the fact that the ships le loves are not defensible and obsolete. Or will he choose to believe that his “defensive weapons” will protect what he loves and will advise the President that sending a task force with twenty thousand young sailors aboard is a prudent and justifiable risk? Just asking and posing a question for discussion. IMHO the issue must be debated outside the Navy.
Probably just kinetic. A titanium rod dropped from space has the same energy as an atomic bomb.
That’s what I thought. Who needs explosives when you’re traveling at mach 4?
CC
“Sorry Navy, but the era of big capital surface ships is over...]
You sink any of our carriers, you just signed your own death certificate.
Obama’s reaction aside.
Site wants me to turn off my addblocker or I can’t continue?
Screw them.
Those ad blockers really work well. Before when I went to a web page I was inundated with ads that would stop my browser. now no problem.
I do not see surface vessels as the primary weapons platform which needs to be tactically rethought if railguns become feasible to deploy significantly.
The big change would be in the vulnerability of aircraft.
A CVN may look huge next to a pier, but it’s quite a tiny blip in the Pacific. Not sure why you believe they’re ‘not defensible and obsolete’. I’ve crossed both Atlantic and Pacific on a CVN, undetected until within 200 NM from land. First time, a former USSR ‘hooker ship’ was the first to find us.
The following is just some personal information, from when I use to do Hand-Reloading. I did some pistols (38 cal. & 45 cal.) As well as my all time favorite, 35 Whelen (poor man's 300 Magnum Holland & Holland, for the first 100 yards) a.k.a. Wildcat[er]. (Meaning, at the time when I was doing reloading, it was the only way to have ammunition to shoot the rifle.) It was also, quite impressive when shooting at the range, it was ALWAYS with out ANY DOUBT, THE LOUDEST, (everyone would come over and ask, What the hell are you shooting, a Cannon) and the biggest (middle of a very sunny day) easy to see; no squinting necessary, FLAME THROWING (S.O.B.) Rifle.
A lot of different Caliber(s) Pistol(s) / Rifle(s) have ammunition, with flat / blunt nose's. Depending, upon the manufacturer, would determine just how much of the nose is flat, compared to the rest of the "bullet," that was loaded into the shell casing.
On my 35 Whelen, caliber diameter was 0.385" in. Dia. On the 180 GR. Flat Nose & 220 Grain Flat Nose, approx Dia. of the "Flat Nose area", was close to something like 0.1875" in. / 3/16th's.
For what it's worth, the rifle(s) I reloaded were: "25/06," the "30/06," and my trustee ".35 Whelen." They ALL USE THE SAME Brass shell casing. Just a matter, of necking {resizing} "Up" or "Down," from the "30/06." Made shooting, VERY CHEAP, affordable.
Wadcutter
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.