The Future Is Now

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Navy Tests High-Powered Electromagnetic Railgun

DAHLGREN, Va. — A futuristic weapon getting a trial run by the Navy demonstrated its destructive power at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren.

In the demonstration Thursday, engineers fired the electromagnetic railgun at what they said was a record power level: 10 megajoules.

The previous railgun power-use record was about 9 megajoules of muzzle energy.

Railguns use electromagnetic energy to launch projectiles long distances — more than 200 nautical miles.

Because the railgun uses electricity and not gunpowder to fire projectiles, it eliminates the possibility of explosions on ships.

The Navy hopes the railgun will eventually replace the standard 5-inch gun on its ships. The weapon isn't expected to be deployed until at least 2020.

[Shade Everdark]

Screw the railgun, I'm waiting for the BFG.

Seriously, though? That's actually pretty awesome.

Less/no powder aboard ship means less chance of explosion, AND the added benefit of more cargo space. Seems pretty win-win to me.

[Msterbeau]

Do they need a giant-sized generator to power it? Wonder what it sounds like when it fires...?

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

The ships already generate a shit load of power...

as for the sound... I would imagine a delayed boom. The arc that is propelling the slug is moving at an extremly high rate... enough to loose most of it's energy when it breaks at the end of the rail and still transfer enough to the slug to propell if at multples of the speed of sound.... so, flash of light and plasma and then BOOM

[Msterbeau]

The ships already generate a shit load of power...

as for the sound... I would imagine a delayed boom. The arc that is propelling the slug is moving at an extremly high rate... enough to loose most of it's energy when it breaks at the end of the rail and still transfer enough to the slug to propell if at multples of the speed of sound.... so, flash of light and plasma and then BOOM

They may generate a shitload but I'm curious if they need a shitload more just for the guns. The probably make a reasonable amount of surplus, but that may not be enough. I can imagine Scotty saying, "We need MORE POWER!!" :-)

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

That's a lot of power, but with a new series of electrically-powered ships coming on line, the Navy figures generating capacity will not be a problem.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

and in all likelihood, the gun uses huge capacitors to so that it can discharge enough power at once. A capacitor would allow a lower power source to generate enough power for the gun.

[predaking]

It isnt that new, the navy has been testing the railgun for years. The smallest one they have (the test bed) was about the size of a VW Bug. When they fire its like those electrical "woosh" sounds then the expanding plasma makes a loud ass "thunder" clap. there is a HUGE bank of caps that feed the gun, they are set up in sequence so the discharge travles in the right direction.

[Head Wreck]

wonder how fast those projectiles are going.

also, not only is there no powder, but the ship can carry more ammo sice is doesnt have to dedicate over half its magazine to powder

[predaking]

wonder how fast those projectiles are going.

also, not only is there no powder, but the ship can carry more ammo sice is doesnt have to dedicate over half its magazine to powder

hypersonic speeds, put it like this you would be dead before your brain could register it.

[Head Wreck]

indeed. which means a flat nose projectile.

that will indeed chew up other boats and with very little lead adjustment to aim

[predaking]

indeed. which means a flat nose projectile.

that will indeed chew up other boats and with very little lead adjustment to aim

nope, rounded. It allows the charge to move around the slug... corners, points, and the like cause arc points. If an arc were to happen in the barrel, it would weld the slug to the rails.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Mach 5 according to the articles I read

[predaking]

Mach 5 according to the articles I read

yup, and they will be faster when they get the super conductor cooling down. Could you imagine a boat getting hit by somthing like that!? the shear force behind the slug would fold it in half!! and ground based targets!?

[predaking]

nope, rounded. It allows the charge to move around the slug... corners, points, and the like cause arc points. If an arc were to happen in the barrel, it would weld the slug to the rails.

correction, the slug used in the test was flat nosed with what looks like somekind of rings around it, maybe teflon... DUH, the rings keep the slug off the rails.

[Reaper]

Sweet! Now I can actually live the Quake 2 lifestyle and take people out with the railgun!

[Head Wreck]

thought so. if flat nose is the only thing that's aerodynamically stable, and a giveaway to the speeds if the slugs are seen with them.

ships nowadays are not the huge armoured behemoths of WWI and WWII, in fact some weapon enclosures are FRP, so penetration of a ship isn't going to be an issue.

i do see them as very usefull to soften a defending force on a beachfront

[Msterbeau]

I want a smaller version mounted to the roof of my car.

[predaking]

thought so. if flat nose is the only thing that's aerodynamically stable, and a giveaway to the speeds if the slugs are seen with them.

ships nowadays are not the huge armoured behemoths of WWI and WWII, in fact some weapon enclosures are FRP, so penetration of a ship isn't going to be an issue.

i do see them as very usefull to soften a defending force on a beachfront

not all the time tho, the slugs they used on the first gun were rounded. There was talk of fin stabilized rounds (an off shoot of the potental orbital launch uses of rail gun tec)

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

thought so. if flat nose is the only thing that's aerodynamically stable, and a giveaway to the speeds if the slugs are seen with them.

ships nowadays are not the huge armoured behemoths of WWI and WWII, in fact some weapon enclosures are FRP, so penetration of a ship isn't going to be an issue.

i do see them as very usefull to soften a defending force on a beachfront

Maybe British ships.. but the armor on US ships is far stronger.

[Head Wreck]

very true.

the british doesnt have much of a navy any more (stupid budget cuts) but generally most modern navy's have reduced the need to armour ships as heavy as going toe to toe with a battleship is very rare nowerdays, as the US demonstrated in WWII, carriers are very effective without putting the main asset in the direct line of fire, and ship bourd missile technology has also furthered this

[predaking]

it's almost a shame about naval armor, how bad ass would it be to see these taking the place of 16" mains on a full blown battleship . A bit on the overkill but 9 (I think thats how meny there are, cant remember now) popping off at once!! I would cry tears of joy then ask them to do it again!

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

8, 9 or 12 16" main guns or from 9 to 14 14" main guns depending on hull class.

[predaking]

8, 9 or 12 16" main guns or from 9 to 14 14" main guns depending on hull class.

12 popped into my head but I wasnt sure, but how cool would that be to see