Navy develops 8-Megajoule railgun

userman

Banned
Mar 7, 2005
2,290
0
0
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/18/navy...s-8-megajoule-railgun-nukem-bows-down/

The mere mention of the word brings back visions of the original first-person-shooters to grace our now-antiquated machines, and now the US Navy is getting real personal with a realized version of the pixelated railgun we all love and adore. Presumably ripped straight from the (admittedly lacking) storyline of Quake, an 8-Megajoule railgun has been officially created, fired, and deemed worthy of flanking our naval ships, which should strike fear in the hearts of anyone wishing us harm. The gun was showcased this week at the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Dahlgren, Virginia, and utilizes massive quantities of electricity rather than gunpowder to propel "nonexplosive projectiles at incredible speeds." The weapon is powerful enough to equal the damage inflicted by a Tomahawk cruise missile, and the device's project director compared the impact to hitting a solid object "going 380 miles-per-hour in a Ford Taurus." Moreover, the railgun touts a 200 to 250 nautical-mile range, compared to the 15 nautical-mile range that current five-inch guns sport now. Interestingly, the weapon should "only" cost around $1,000 per shot once loaded onboard, which is chump change compared to the cool million that vanishes each time a cruise missile is deployed, and if everything goes as planned, we'll be seeing a 32-Megajoule prototype in June, with a 64-Megajoule rendition adorning our ships by 2020.

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/17/1746252&from=rss

"The Free Lance-Star newspaper is reporting that the Navy Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren, Virginia has successfully demonstrated an 8-megajoule electromagnetic rail gun. A 32-megajoule version is due to be tested in June. A 64-megajoule version is anticipated to extend the range of naval gunfire (currently about 15 nautical miles for a 5-inch naval gun) to more than 200 nautical miles by 2020. The projectiles are small, but go so fast that have enough kinetic punch to replace a Tomahawk missile at a fraction of the cost. In the final version, they will apex at 95 miles altitude, well into space. These systems were initially part of Reagan's SDI program ("Star Wars"). An interesting tidbit in the article is that the rail gun is only expected to fire ten times or less per day, presumably because of the amount of electricity needed. I guess we now need a warp core to power them."
 

UnatcoAgent

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 1999
5,462
1
0
This is why I like you Americans, you do all the crazy military sh!t and we get to watch
 

JMWarren

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2003
1,201
0
0
Wow....that will put those nuclear powered boats reactors to good work! The larger ones might even give some smaller boats the fire power that the old battleships had....
 

Heisenberg

Lifer
Dec 21, 2001
10,621
1
0
Originally posted by: novasatori
wow
man imagine an old USN BB with 4 x trip barrel 64megajoule rail guns...
Iowa class ships + railguns, along with a small nuclear reactor for power would possibly be the coolest thing ever.
 

novasatori

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2003
3,851
1
0
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
Originally posted by: novasatori
wow
man imagine an old USN BB with 4 x trip barrel 64megajoule rail guns...
Iowa class ships + railguns, along with a small nuclear reactor for power would possibly be the coolest thing ever.

yea exactly
you will probably need more than one small reactor, so we'll give it 4 nuclear reactors

a landing pad for the JSF too, and ummm tons of missile defense systems, so it will be wll protected, and a nice anti sub warfare setup - now we have the floating behemoth that will dominate the woooooooooorrrrrrrrrrld

YES
 

91TTZ

Lifer
Jan 31, 2005
14,374
1
0
One thing I see as misleading is the quoted range.

Sure, this can throw the 3 Kg nonexplosive projectile 250 miles, but at 250 miles a nonexplosive projectile is not going to pack any punch (since it's lost its speed), except for the projectile falling to the ground at the end of its ballistic trajectory. The real power comes from the massive kinetic energy it will have at close ranges.
 

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,284
1,998
126
Nice to see that national defense is finally catching up to the technology used in amusement park rides.
 

91TTZ

Lifer
Jan 31, 2005
14,374
1
0
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Nice to see that national defense is finally catching up to the technology used in amusement park rides.

The next obvious step is to make 8 Megajoule amusement park rides.
 

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,284
1,998
126
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Nice to see that national defense is finally catching up to the technology used in amusement park rides.

The next obvious step is to make 8 Megajoule amusement park rides.


Make an 8-megajoule ride that tosses riders 200 miles and there would be people lining up for the chance.
 

beemercer

Senior member
Feb 10, 2006
817
0
0
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Nice to see that national defense is finally catching up to the technology used in amusement park rides.

The next obvious step is to make 8 Megajoule amusement park rides.

:laugh:.
 

91TTZ

Lifer
Jan 31, 2005
14,374
1
0
Originally posted by: rahul
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: rahul
Originally posted by: userman

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/17/1746252&from=rss

"In the final version, they will apex at 95 miles altitude, well into space."

Won't the projectile simply burn up on re-entering the atmosphere?:confused:

No.

Why not?

Because of the amount of energy it needs to dissipate.

This projectile has a better chance of burning up the moment it leaves the end of the railgun, since that's the fastest it's going to go.

Objects coming in from orbit, such as old satellites, are going about 17,000 mph, and they're much higher so they'll accelerate on their way down until the atmosphere gets thicker.
 

rahul

Senior member
Nov 1, 2004
473
0
71
Originally posted by: 91TTZ


Because of the amount of energy it needs to dissipate.

This projectile has a better chance of burning up the moment it leaves the end of the railgun, since that's the fastest it's going to go.

Objects coming in from orbit, such as old satellites, are going about 17,000 mph, and they're much higher so they'll accelerate on their way down until the atmosphere gets thicker.

An old satellite is also going to be much larger than the projectile they plan on using.
 

imported_Tick

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
4,682
1
0
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
One thing I see as misleading is the quoted range.

Sure, this can throw the 3 Kg nonexplosive projectile 250 miles, but at 250 miles a nonexplosive projectile is not going to pack any punch (since it's lost its speed), except for the projectile falling to the ground at the end of its ballistic trajectory. The real power comes from the massive kinetic energy it will have at close ranges.

Yes, it will have lost a lot of it's velocity in the X direction, but it will still have speed, and heat, from it's fall from 95 miles up. Their was a plan a while back fro 'rods from god' that used solely gravitational energy. So yes, their may be some hubris involved, but I would bet it still has a decent punch that far out. Of course, the military wont tell us that untill 20 years from now.