Posted on 05/22/2024 12:51:43 PM PDT by Red Badger
China’s latest test shows commitment to perfecting electromagnetic tech while US waffles between defunding or reviving its efforts
The Type 072 destroyer (pictured) was spotted in 2018 carrying what military experts believed to be the PLA Navy’s first electromagnetic rail gun. Photo: Handout / SCMP China’s latest electromagnetic railgun test ultimately failed but underscored its relentless pursuit of the weapon, contrasting sharply with the US’s uncertain commitment to the potential game-changing technology.
This month, the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported that the People’s Liberation Army-Navy (PLA-N) tested an electromagnetic railgun by firing a smart bomb 15 kilometers into the stratosphere at a speed exceeding Mach 5. The test was later declared unsuccessful.
A Naval Engineering University team led by Lu Junyong used artificial intelligence technology to identify and address the cause of the railgun projectile’s undesired tilt during ascent, according to the SCMP report.
The projectile accelerated at roughly 35 times the force of gravity for around five seconds after launch, confirming the researchers’ claim that it exceeded hypervelocity, or Mach 5.
The report says that Chinese policymakers expect the railgun project to advance civilian technologies such as high-speed railways, affordable space launches and obvious military applications.
SCMP notes that while the US Navy stopped its railgun development efforts in 2021, due to high energy requirements and poor barrel life, Chinese scientists and engineers have received consistent support, resulting in a series of breakthroughs.
Chinese policymakers anticipate that the rail gun project’s progress will also spur the development of cutting-edge civilian technologies such as hyper-speed railways and more cost-effective space launches.
In a March 2024 article for Defense One, Matt Bruzzese and Peter Singer note that, 20 years ago, Chinese leaders recognized that obtaining advanced shipboard power systems was challenging as foreign countries had restricted their exports to China.
In response, Bruzzese and Singer note that China established the National Key Laboratory in 2007 to advance ship-based electricity and electromagnetics.
They point out that Lu, the same scientist mentioned by SCMP, has been working on those challenges for the past two decades, even before the laboratory was established.
Bruzzese and Singer add that Lu also worked on the railgun wear and failure problem, which has troubled US researchers for at least a decade. In addition to advancing railgun technology, the laboratory has made significant progress in electric and electromagnetic applications.
These include electromagnetic catapults for China’s growing aircraft carrier fleet, a medium-voltage DC-integrated power system to enable the PLA-N’s newest warships to accommodate advanced weaponry and systems, intelligent micro-grids, a direct-drive wind power inverter and an intelligent power station for outposts in the South China Sea.
The US may be taking a different approach to developing the technology. An April 2022 US Congressional Research Service (CRS) report mentions that while the US stopped funding for its railgun project as a naval gunfire support weapon, the US Navy has acknowledged that the gun has potential for missile defense.
The CRS report notes that railgun projectiles costing just US$25,000 each and fired at hypersonic speeds can destroy much more expensive anti-ship missiles. Still, it mentions the difficulty of defending against a swarm of incoming missiles. The report says it takes 300 seconds to detect a ballistic missile launch signature, track it and calculate the vector for defensive projectiles.
The CRS report also asks critical questions about the development of railgun technology for missile defense, including regarding their effectiveness against drone swarms or saturation missile attacks and whether current and planned US Navy ships meet the space and power requirements for such weapons.
The US Navy’s upcoming DDG(X) destroyers are 40% larger than the preceding Arleigh Burke-class and will have an Integrated Power System (IPS) to allocate power to propulsion or weapons systems in real-time. But Asia Times has pointed out severe limitations in US naval shipbuilding capacity and the potential folly of putting so much capability into a few potentially vulnerable ships.
Despite stopping railgun development in 2021, the US has continued railgun testing by firing advanced hypersonic-guided munitions that could be useful for missile defense.
In March 2022, General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems (GA-EMS) completed a significant test series in partnership with the US Army and US Navy to advance gun-launched defensive projectile interceptor designs.
Identical projectiles were test-fired from a railgun and a powder gun at White Sands Missile Range at Dugway Proving Ground in New Mexico to achieve record hypersonic velocities and to test guided flight capabilities.
GA-EMS provided projectiles with integrated gun-hardened guidance electronics to test their ability to maintain data links and control trajectory under intense G-forces at hypersonic speeds.
The initial test series involved firing projectiles from the US Navy’s 32-megajoule railgun system at the White Sands Missile Range. In contrast, the subsequent test series utilized the same projectile designs launched from a 120mm powder gun.
However, the production of those advanced munitions could prove challenging. One reason the US Navy removed the Advanced Gun System (AGS) aboard its Zumwalt-class destroyers was the high cost of its ammunition, estimated at $800,000 per round.
Reducing planned Zumwalt class destroyers from 32 to just three ships drove the exorbitant per ammunition unit cost. Each ship could carry 990 AGS rounds and hit targets at 150 kilometers with ten rounds per minute.
It remains to be seen whether the US Navy’s upcoming DDG(X) will be built in limited numbers, which can significantly raise guided railgun projectile costs.
Christian Orr mentions in an October 2023 19FortyFive article that the US retested its railgun technology that month. However, he says the test video does not explain whether the US Navy is serious about reviving its railgun project.
The US may also be engaging foreign partners to continue railgun research. Orr also an article from the same month by Asia Times about Japan’s railgun test, in which Japan test-fired its railgun prototype from a floating platform at sea.
Orr also mentions that the Japanese Ministry of Defense (MOD) is looking to partner with the US in developing railgun technology to defeat hypersonic weapons. The Japanese MOD has contacted defense contractors BAE Systems and General Atomics, both of which have worked on railgun technology.
Projects like this need to be taken out of the super bloated, bureaucratic N.Virginia defense-crony network, who are robbing America blind, and given to engineering and tech entrepreneurs for development
Bkmk
I believe that directed energy weapons (laser) is much more promising than electromagnetic weapons.
I believe the main problem is the amount of energy it takes to charge the railgun systems between shots.
From a Firesign Theater comedy album:
Blow, wind blow 🌬️
Break wind, break 💨
Correct.
Ohm’s Law will not be repealed any time soon.................
The US railgun development project was cancelled after analysis determined that it would be cheaper to destroy targets by dropping pallets of $100 bills from orbit. ;-/
I saw that image 5 years ago. Materials science has not progressed enough to make them any more workable in the field than lasers.
Rail guns are cool. But not practical. Except a few mounted at our south border.
The main problem with railguns so far has been rail (”barrel”) erosion.
O.K., I'm confused about what they are talking about here. The projectile accelerates for 5 seconds after launch? How does that work, unless it is rocket assisted?
No worries…
We’ll just hurl improper pronouns at them.
That’ll show the little bastards…
Just take Hitler's MONSTROUS rail cannon, the Krupp’s Schwerer Gustav and make it float!
E=m*V^2. So rail guns will eventually win.
I may be wrong, but I believe that would only apply to kinetic energy. Directed energy weapons don’t depend upon kinetic energy, but rather thermal and electromagnetic effects. They also don’t rely upon projectiles, so no mass involved, the “m” in your equation..
Yes, directed energy weapons depend on getting high power radiation (various types and tech) on a target. My comment was based on the topic of rail guns. Rapid acceleration of projectiles. Smaller mass at higher velocities can prove immense amount of energy on targets. Rail guns have lots of technical issues to still overcome. Barrel lifespan is a big one in previous versions but I’m sure it’s getting better.
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.