Navy Sets World Record With Incredible, Sci-Fi Weapon

[Krauter]

Ahh, my mistake then TLAM. From what I understood from Takeda's description, I took the rounds it fired to simply use their kinetic energy to destroy a target rather than explosives. If capable of using guided smart munitions, like you say with a high ROF, long range and cost effectiveness...

I think the Iowas are going to be making a comeback.

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Krauter

Ahh, my mistake then TLAM. From what I understood from Takeda's description, I took the rounds it fired to simply use their kinetic energy to destroy a target rather than explosives. If capable of using guided smart munitions, like you say with a high ROF, long range and cost effectiveness...

I think the Iowas are going to be making a comeback.

To answer your previous question though, some anti tank sabot rounds do only use kinetic energy to destroy their targets. The rounds right now in the rail gun, from what i read, are kinetic only.


And where did we get these small city power plant requirements? From what i saw in the article, they never mentioned the power required to fire it, jsut the amount of energy released in the round.

To convey a sense of just how much damage, Ellis told FoxNews.com that the big guns on the deck of a warship are measured by their muzzle energy in megajoules. A single megajoule is roughly equivalent to a 1-ton car traveling at 100 mph. Multiple that by 33 and you get a picture of what would happen when such a weapon hits a target.

[Krauter]

For kinetic AT rounds, aren't the majority of them made of either depleted uranium or tungsten? (ie: Denser metals?)

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Krauter

For kinetic AT rounds, aren't the majority of them made of either depleted uranium or tungsten? (ie: Denser metals?)

Yes, they work by having a dense core, with a larger "case" around it (I don't know the technical term). The case allows the Sabot round to be loaded into much larger bore guns than the core.



The case, as you can see, breaks away in flight, and the core flies just like a dart would. Upon impact with an armored target, it bores through the armor via the kinetic energy, but that process "plasmafies" the core. So now this super heated uranium plasma is bouncing around inside the target, incinerating anything it touches. I think they work best on armored targets, as they need that process to be effective. They'd simply pass through light targets, like cars and airplanes.

Now imagine this same round, coming out of a naval gun with MORE kinetic energy than those huge 14" and 16" ships used to carry. Since this is (I assume) a strictly Line of sight round, I'd imagine they'd use this type of round in Surface to Surface warfare, as it makes a very small hole, but huge damage inside.

[krashkart]

^^ A very large and horrifying flechette.

The case that breaks away is the sabot. The example in your photo there is APFSDS - Armor Piercing, Fin Stabilized, Discarding Sabot.

[MaddogK]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

And where did we get these small city power plant requirements? From what i saw in the article, they never mentioned the power required to fire it, jsut the amount of energy released in the round.

The joule (pronounced /ˈdʒuːl/ or /ˈdʒaʊl/); symbol J) is a derived unit of energy or work in the International System of Units. It is equal to the energy expended (or work done) in applying a force of one newton through a distance of one metre (1 newton metre or N·m), or in passing an electric current of one ampere through a resistance of one ohm for one second. It is named after the English physicist James Prescott Joule (1818–1889)

1 kilowatt hour = 3.6×106 J (or 3.6 MJ)

One joule in everyday life is approximately:

• the energy required to lift a small apple one metre straight up.
• the energy released when that same apple falls one metre to the ground.

We're talking about an electromagnet so I'd think the estimate of power required would be somewhat accurate, but to be fair a joule can be mathematically converted to calories so we could probably estimate the power of this rail gun in candy bars.

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by MaddogK

T

We're talking about an electromagnet so I'd think the estimate of power required would be somewhat accurate, but to be fair a joule can be mathematically converted to calories so we could probably estimate the power of this rail gun in candy bars.

That's where I thought you guys got your numbers. While I won't disagree with you, there still then remains a chance (big or small), that your power estimates are grossly over (or even under) estimated. But I'll leave that upto the guys who actually know the math's better than me.

I just had these visions of a battleship, with it's magazines removed and replaced by another reactor or two, pulling into Tokyo for some R&R time and having the local power company requesting to plug into it to help relieve some brownouts they've been having.

[Reece]

Rather than relying on a explosion to fire a projectile, the technology uses an electromagnetic current to accelerate a non-explosive bullet at several times the speed of sound.

If this is true then what is all the fire behind the projectile? super heated air/extremely hot projectile or something?

[Growler]

The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Platapus

I was thinking that the high energy of the rail technology would only be used to push a projectile to a high-altitude if used in indirect fire. Then the kinetic warhead would simply fall.

How would an indirect fire rail gun be any more powerful than an indirect chemically propelled projectile also used for indirect fire?

My point was that indirect fire does not seem to be the best usage of the rail technology and the speed of the projectile. I believe the best usage of the rail technology would be direct fire where the kinetic power would be used directly.

Even if its not the best use of it its still a massive upgrade. I just read that its expected to have a range of 200 to 250 nm. Compare that to the 10 mile range of a 5" gun firing normal rounds. The rail gun could also fire rocket assisted explosive rounds much like the current navy guns.

Oh and I just read that this rail gun is expected in the indirect fire mode to have the explosive force of about 2/3 of a 16" gun shell at 225 nm range.

Originally Posted by Reece

If this is true then what is all the fire behind the projectile? super heated air/extremely hot projectile or something?

Friction of the projectile and heat for the elctricity flowing though the rails.

[Gerald]

Wonder what the projectile can cost, hardly peanuts,

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Krauter

Ahh, my mistake then TLAM. From what I understood from Takeda's description, I took the rounds it fired to simply use their kinetic energy to destroy a target rather than explosives. If capable of using guided smart munitions, like you say with a high ROF, long range and cost effectiveness...

I think the Iowas are going to be making a comeback.

They would probably be the ideal platform....and on cost grounds not too expensive to refit especially as they are already built.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Krauter

Ahh, my mistake then TLAM. From what I understood from Takeda's description, I took the rounds it fired to simply use their kinetic energy to destroy a target rather than explosives. If capable of using guided smart munitions, like you say with a high ROF, long range and cost effectiveness...

I think the Iowas are going to be making a comeback.

No reason why it cant do both. Maybe not with the MK1 Rail Gun, but very soon after its fielded. However there is no real reason why a Kinetic projectile can't be guided.

I see this launching system replacing far more than just guns in the future. Up until the early 1980s ships had four or five missile launchers (Harpoon, SM-1, Tomahawk, ASROC, Sea Sparrow) then the VLS came around and all those eventually fit in one launcher (Even Harpoon now, although the USN is not going to buy it). Think of a rail gun with a 25 in with, use that to hurtle a 1 ton object say five miles, then that object breaks open and out pops a cruise missile. No blast deflectors or hot or cold launch systems. Need gun fire, reduce the space between the rails and fire some SABOT rounds. Soon you will be able to launch anything from one of these; missiles, torpedoes, shells. The ship's entire weapons package that can be fired from one launcher.