Navy Railgun Superweapon

[OverVolt]

Why don't they drive shells with small nuclear explosions?

I'm using hyperbole to make fun of the ridiculousness of that weapon 🙂

 

[LegendKiller]

the primary benefit is no propellant storage onboard (no risk of explosion, no need for extra armor to protect, simplified construction, reduced overall ship weight = lower costs all around)

while ship to ship combat may change if this is the default weapon, the primary role for something like this would be ship to shore bombardment. A projectile moving this fast with a guidance system like on the currently developed smart artillery could effectively replace our tomahawk missile systems. "need to place a precision strike on a uranium enrichment centrifuge 50 miles inland? we can do that". no radar warning system or sam system is going to be able to intercept these things.

This wouldn't get near to replacing tomahawk.

 

[FallenHero]

This wouldn't get near to replacing tomahawk.

For shore bombardments and near shore strikes it would. Near instantaneous strikes and rounds being fired from each gun every 15-20 seconds? With cheaper munitions? How would it NOT replace the tomahawk?

 

[Veramocor]

Why don't they drive shells with small nuclear explosions?

I'm using hyperbole to make fun of the ridiculousness of that weapon 🙂

Metal Gear Solid wants its plot line back.

Edit: Read it incorrectly thought you wanted to shoot nuclear weapons with a rail gun.

 

[LegendKiller]

For shore bombardments and near shore strikes it would. Near instantaneous strikes and rounds being fired from each gun every 15-20 seconds? With cheaper munitions? How would it NOT replace the tomahawk?

I wasn't aware that the tomahawk, which has a range of 8x what this thing is projected to have was going to be replaced by something that doesn't have the ability to drop cluster munitions and other such things.

 

[FallenHero]

I wasn't aware that the tomahawk, which has a range of 8x what this thing is projected to have was going to be replaced by something that doesn't have the ability to drop cluster munitions and other such things.

Because 20+ guns firing 3-6 rounds a minute with a larger destructive area can't have the same effect, right?

 

[OverVolt]

Because 20+ guns firing 3-6 rounds a minute with a larger destructive area can't have the same effect, right?

Whatever you say captain armchair gunner.

=]

 

[Exterous]

Not sure if serious...

Good.

the warheads themselves are 100% safe and potentially very cheap hunks of iron

A drastic cost savings over missles. Of course now we are actually getting into the relm of war being too cheap and impersonal (drones)

Bring back the USS Missouri with added rail guns!

*drool*

 

[Exterous]

Because 20+ guns firing 3-6 rounds a minute with a larger destructive area can't have the same effect, right?

Well, if there is a mountain, hill etc in the way....

 

[Joseph F]

Good.



A drastic cost savings over missles. Of course now we are actually getting into the relm of war being too cheap and impersonal (drones)



*drool*

Haven't you ever heard of the term "capacitor bank"?

 

[Howard]

Haven't you ever heard of the term "capacitor bank"?

What does that have to do with what you quoted?

 

[OverVolt]

What does that have to do with what you quoted?

It means he wins every argument he ever gets himself into by changing the topic.

 

[irishScott]

Well, if there is a mountain, hill etc in the way....

Any reason this has to be a direct-fire weapon? Why not mount it so it can arc projectiles at a sharp angle? Rail-gun mortar FTW!

 

[irishScott]

I wasn't aware that the tomahawk, which has a range of 8x what this thing is projected to have was going to be replaced by something that doesn't have the ability to drop cluster munitions and other such things.

Yes, and the tomahawk will thus become relegated to longer-range/specialized missions. No reason to expend 200 tomahawks in shoreline bombardment when you can just pepper them with what amount to small, slow meteor strikes.

 

[Jadow]

Any reason this has to be a direct-fire weapon? Why not mount it so it can arc projectiles at a sharp angle? Rail-gun mortar FTW!

the energy comes from the direct velocity coming out of the barrel. If you lob it and rain it down on something you lose a ton of energy. Instead of hitting it at 4500mph or whatever crazy speed it is, it will hit it at terminal velocity.

 

[irishScott]

the energy comes from the direct velocity coming out of the barrel. If you lob it and rain it down on something you lose a ton of energy. Instead of hitting it at 4500mph or whatever crazy speed it is, it will hit it at terminal velocity.

So kill the power as necessary and design a traditional warhead for it that can be used in such instances.

 

[Jadow]

So kill the power as necessary and design a traditional warhead for it that can be used in such instances.

kinda defeats the purpose of a rail gun. If you want to use a traditional warhead, then use a traditional method of firing it.

Rail Guns do their damage from pure impact, not from explosives.

 

[Joseph F]

What does that have to do with what you quoted?

It means he wins every argument he ever gets himself into by changing the topic.

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.

I fail to see what getting money from a tiny bank/atm has to do with rail guns

Not sure if serious...

Good.

Haven't you ever heard of the term "capacitor bank"?

...Need I say more?

 

[janas19]

...Need I say more?

You needn't. Lol :thumbup:

 

[Howard]

...Need I say more?

I am simultaneously in awe and disgust.

 

[yhelothar]

40lbs @ 5600mph

KE = 1/2mv^2

That's basically as much energy as 40,000 SUV's travelling at 40mph. 😱

 

[dighn]

kinda defeats the purpose of a rail gun. If you want to use a traditional warhead, then use a traditional method of firing it.

Rail Guns do their damage from pure impact, not from explosives.

just makes it more versatile if it can be configured on-the-fly to deliver shells at longer range than typical guns.

 

[irishScott]

kinda defeats the purpose of a rail gun. If you want to use a traditional warhead, then use a traditional method of firing it.

Rail Guns do their damage from pure impact, not from explosives.

The idea is this is to replace the big guns right? If so, IMO if possible they should be able to improve upon said big guns in ever possible way.

 

[bononos]

Is it similar to the gauss rifle in mw?

 

[Doppel]

There are 100 joules in a megawatt and 1000 megawatts in a megajoule. This weapon has the destructive force equal to dropping three small towns from orbit onto target or equivalent to 12 michael moore's impacting at Mach 6. It uses technology discovered in King Tut's tomb and there will be miniaturized versions coming to the consumer market in 2016.