• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Navy Railgun Superweapon

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
sdifox said:
no way. we don't have any power source with that kind of density. And if we do, there are much better uses than powering a rifle.
Click to expand...

Recoil is also an issue. If the railgun can fire a projectile with much more energy than even a 50 cal sniper rifle then it would pretty much rip your arm off when fired.
 
Crono said:
I doubt it. Civilian research labs and universities are where a good deal of the latest advancements have come from. The government (DARPA especially) does help fund some of those projects, though.
Click to expand...



I'll keep on enjoying the frequent life changers like GPS and the internets while you wait for the civilian research labs to match it. 😀
 
Nintendesert said:
I'll keep on enjoying the frequent life changers like GPS and the internets while you wait for the civilian research labs to match it. 😀
Click to expand...

Neither of which are recent developments. Might as well talk about the space race.

And anyway, companies like Xerox/PARC, Bell Labs and IBM have noted contributions to computing and communications, and the development of the internet was a combined effort by ARPANET with universities.
 
Last edited:
Crono said:
Neither of which are recent developments. Might as well talk about the space race.

And anyway, companies like Xerox/PARC, Bell Labs and IBM have noted contributions to computing and communications, and the development of the internet was a combined effort by ARPANET with universities.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Al Gore created the interwebs.
 
Good now we can defend against giant robots.

If this becomes common, then it could be a big threat to US surface ships. Intercepting something moving that fast wouldn't be practical and the flight times would be short. Would be kind of like the KE rounds used on tanks.
 
I can't wait until scientists refine supercapacitors to the point where they have near-zero internal resistance and are dense enough to provide twenty shots from a magazine-sized bank.
 
If this becomes reality, than railguns will probably also spawn some other cool weapons like directed-energy weapons or even plasma beam type devices.

This type of weaponry will probably be installed on a ship of some sort. Some kind of big ship will be necessary to mount more than one of these weapons on board as well as have the nuclear reactors on board to generate the electricity needed for the weapons. We may see new kinds of armor developed such as magnetic field type armor necessary to deflect charged particle or ray type weapons (also needs electricity).

These weapon systems, armor and electrical requirements may mean the return of big battleship type of vessels! Fucking awesome!
 
Anyone have the monologue from that srgt in ME2 that is talking to some soldiers about the safety with their rail gun rifles?
 
Joseph F said:
I can't wait until scientists refine supercapacitors to the point where they have near-zero internal resistance and are dense enough to provide twenty shots from a magazine-sized bank.
Click to expand...

I fail to see what getting money from a tiny bank/atm has to do with rail guns
 
By the sounds of it, this thing needs a lot of power to fire just one slug. I don't know how much wattage the 32 megajoule blast converts into, but that energy burst seems to last a fraction of a second so, probably, this cannon eats up hundreds of megawatts on a single shot.

If that's the case, high power lasers could be a much more efficient method of defense (more so because they already exist and are practically combat-ready now).

Which means that naval artillery is pretty much the only military application for a rail gun ... dunno, doesn't really seem that useful when compared to other weapon systems like ship to ship missiles and naval aircraft.
 
-Slacker- said:
By the sounds of it, this thing needs a lot of power to fire just one slug. I don't know how much wattage the 32 megajoule blast converts into, but that energy burst seems to last a fraction of a second so, probably, this cannon eats up hundreds of megawatts on a single shot.

If that's the case, high power lasers could be a much more efficient method of defense (more so because they already exist and are practically combat-ready now).

Which means that naval artillery is pretty much the only military application for a rail gun ... dunno, doesn't really seem that useful when compared to other weapon systems like ship to ship missiles and naval aircraft.
Click to expand...


No one thinks that lasers are an effective means of defense. No one. Good luck getting over the horizon shots with a laser.
 
-Slacker- said:
By the sounds of it, this thing needs a lot of power to fire just one slug. I don't know how much wattage the 32 megajoule blast converts into, but that energy burst seems to last a fraction of a second so, probably, this cannon eats up hundreds of megawatts on a single shot.

If that's the case, high power lasers could be a much more efficient method of defense (more so because they already exist and are practically combat-ready now).
Click to expand...

1 watt=1 joule/1 sec

Due to the how fast it's fired I would guess that it would take about 32 megawatts per shot at most...and I would think the kinetic energy of the impact would be much greater than the pinpoint beam of a laser.
 
-Slacker- said:
Which means that naval artillery is pretty much the only military application for a rail gun ... dunno, doesn't really seem that useful when compared to other weapon systems like ship to ship missiles and naval aircraft.
Click to expand...

Railguns and other weapons like this would make anti-ship missiles obsolete. Missiles and aircraft can be shot down by precise shots from these weapons. These new weapons also travel so damn fast, much faster than any missile and can inflict way more damage. Much like after world war 2, when carrier based aircraft and later anti-ship missiles supplanted battleship naval artillery, these new weapons would turn the tide again and armored big gun warships would re-appear.
 
NikolaeVarius said:
No one thinks that lasers are an effective means of defense. No one. Good luck getting over the horizon shots with a laser.
Click to expand...


That's why I said railguns would probably only make sense in ship to ship warfare.

corwin said:
1 watt=1 joule/1 sec

Due to the how fast it's fired I would guess that it would take about 32 megawatts per shot at most...and I would think the kinetic energy of the impact would be much greater than the pinpoint beam of a laser.
Click to expand...

Sounded like a lot less than a second to me ... anyway..
 
NetWareHead said:
Railguns and other weapons like this would make anti-ship missiles obsolete. Missiles and aircraft can be shot down by precise shots from these weapons. These new weapons also travel so damn fast, much faster than any missile and can inflict way more damage. Much like after world war 2, when carrier based aircraft and later anti-ship missiles supplanted battleship naval artillery, these new weapons would turn the tide again and armored big gun warships would re-appear.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about that, you'll need a very high fire rate (extremely difficult with a railgun), great targeting (not easy) and very fast response (how fast can you swing the gun barrel around) to make missiles obsolete. Missiles are comparatively cheap.
 
Remobz said:
Looks like another waste of US tax payers money courtesy of the Military.
Click to expand...

http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Click to expand...

Dwight D. Eisenhower...the last good Republican President of the USA.
 
-Slacker- said:
Sounded like a lot less than a second to me ... anyway..
Click to expand...
Well to get more technical a Joule is a measure of energy produced not power itself, 1 joule of energy is produced from 1 watt of power for 1 second...so technically it could require 128 megawatts of power for .25 seconds or whatever but averaged out it would be 32 MW for one second...so I guess it could be all in how you look at it as to how much "power" it needs, essentially a crap load for a very short period of time
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top