Why not just use rockets or missiles even?
Making a gun do what a rocket or missile does seems completely unnecessary.
“Yes, but these go up 11..”
Yes, it’s a rocket, but now we fire it from a cannon...
>>>Why not just use rockets or missiles even?
Making a gun do what a rocket or missile does seems completely unnecessary.<<<
The rocket assisted gun has advantages over a missile cruiser. The Zumwalts were going to have two AGS (Advanced Gun System) that would each be able to fire 10 rounds a second. So in a shock and awe type of bombardment you could get off 20 precise rounds in a minute. But the magazine was 304 shells so you could keep that up longer. I am totally ignorant on say the Ticonderoga class, if it has a magazine on board to replace what is in the vertical launchers, but I think not. Anyways that ship has 2-61 missile cells that can fit things like harpoons or tomahawks. The AGS ammo was priced at $800k per, which is probably due to only 3 ships being built. If the entire 21 ship class was built the price would probably have come down a lot. The tomahawks are like 1.8m per round but much much more capable and have a much longer range.
Considering the last Ticonderoga cruiser built has a displacement roughly 2/3 of the Zumwalt you can argue that the navy could have just built a few more cruisers that were compatible with the rest of the fleet. But keep in mind the navy believes the rail gun will be used. It just appears it will be about a decade later than initially thought.