“...due to the high muzzle velocity at which projectiles leave a rail gun, there is abnormal wear and tear on the rail portion of the delivery system...”
“Abnormal” only in comparison to wear and tear in more conventionally propelled gun systems.
The current densities and EM field strengths required to accelerate the projectile to the stated velocities create plasma, which does erode various launch system components. Very short service life.
EM railgun systems are still developmental. Fuzing systems, bursting charges, and guidance systems cannot survive the g forces of launch. So we are currently limited to solid projectiles that cannot perform course corrections inflight. Makes the most severe demands on initial gunlaying precision. Cheerleading about how “devastating” the projectile is on impact via kinetic energy alone is making a virtue of the constraints.
The stresses and strains of launch are only a portion of the demands placed on carrier-launched aircraft. They are forced to give up significant percentages of range and payload capability because they have to be built to endure such great forces without falling apart. Puts them forever behind land-based aircraft.
There are very few ‘perfect’ weapons.
Of course, historically speaking, it has resulted in the production of aircraft that were very rugged due to that intentional overdesign.