Navy Sets World Record With Incredible, Sci-Fi Weapon

[papa_smurf]

I'd assume they use large capacitors to produce the energy, since the firing procedure only lasts so little time. Then they recharge the capacitors while they replace the rails of the gun for the next round.

That would be the most sensible way of storing energy between shots.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[JSLTIGER]

Originally Posted by Platapus

But can a rail gun be used for indirect fire? I don't think so. I think it is a direct fire only weapon. Great for the ocean, but unless you want to bombard a beach at 150 miles, I don't think a rail gun would work for long range inland bombardment.

Still way cool technology.

Always had a thing for kinetic weapons.

Why couldn't it be used for indirect fire? What goes up must come down, right? A projectile using kinetic energy delivered by an electric current should move in the same manner as that deriving its kinetic energy from a chemical explosion, in other words, ballistically, with a quadratic arc.

[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.

[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,

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Vendor

Wonder what the projectile can cost, hardly peanuts,

At the current market price of Tugstin: 720 USD for the raw material alone for one 40 lb round.

For refining and manufacturing lets quadruple that to 1,680 USD

Price of tomahawk LACM: 569,000 USD per unit.

So for the price of one Tomahawk the Navy can buy 338 Rail gun rounds. (FWI the US Fired under 300 Tomahawks in the first gulf war).

For the Pentagon 1,680 USD is peanuts.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

At the current market price of Tugstin: 720 USD for the raw material alone for one 40 lb round.

For refining and manufacturing lets quadruple that to 1,680 USD

Price of tomahawk LACM: 569,000 USD per unit.

So for the price of one Tomahawk the Navy can buy 338 Rail gun rounds. (FWI the US Fired under 300 Tomahawks in the first gulf war).

For the Pentagon 1,680 USD is peanuts.

I can imagine That,

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

For the Pentagon 1,680 USD is peanuts.

Ya, there's proof Hammers cost that much.
And Crapper seat lids.
So I'd expect rounds for a Rail-Gun to be higher just because the way the 'system' works.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by privateer

So I'd expect rounds for a Rail-Gun to be higher just because the way the 'system' works.

Its the way the system works that makes it cheap. This gun could fire bits of iron ore as long as its magnetic. And at the speeds advertised would be quite effective against soft skinned targets.

A weapon like the tomahawk is expensive but you can fire it off off anything because everything needed for firing is built in to the weapon, you just need a platform. The rail gun has everything needed to fire it built in to the system except the projectile so its cost per shot is a great deal less.