>>>>So, rail guns aren’t going to sea in the near future - at least with the US Navy.<<<<<
They might. The gun that was axed was not a rail gun. While this ship was being built, it was thought the rail gun tech would be realized in time to use it on this ship. That is why this class produces so much electricity. However when the rail gun wasn’t ready a special gun was installed to use a type of ammo that had a rocket assist. The range iirc was bout 100 miles with fins and stuff and guidance to make it hit coordinates precisely. The only problem was that the ammo was so darn expensive. This is in contrast to the rail gun. Where the ammo is dirt cheap. So the ship was a fail. It was supposed to be expensive to build, but cheap to fight/train with. Now it was also expensive to fight/train with too.
Why not just use rockets or missiles even?
Making a gun do what a rocket or missile does seems completely unnecessary.
I read an article where the Army was working on a 155mm that can fire 1000 miles. If true the rail gun on a ship would be redundant and a waste. I think the Zumwalt and LCS ships as a total waste of money. They have little to no offensive punch and very little defensive weaponry. You have fancy stealthy hulls with nothing in them of value aside from the crews.
An updated Spruance class with bigger guns and modernized weapons or more Arleigh Burkes would make more sense at this point.