Railgun, anyone?

[dandin384]

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/us-navy-u ... -rail-gun/
http://www.engadget.com/2014/04/07/navy-railgun/

Who knows how far away this is from actual deployment on ships, the video says 2016 for testing but anything could happen.

Nonetheless this is an exciting new development in terms of Naval Warfare, everything seems to work on land, the rounds are small and cheap, and the weapon itself is cheap. Looking forward to seeing where this goes.

[AlmightyTallest]

These have been in development for awile, the best footage showcasing the round and the advantages were in a video from General Atomics with their "Blitzer" railgun system. You can see the video below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWZPp3aEjuM

[dandin384]

ORIGINAL: AlmightyTallest

These have been in development for awile

Yup, testing for a couple years at the least, this was mainly to highlight the announcement of a 2016 sea trial, not announce the railgun itself.

[AlmightyTallest]

Oh, I see what you mean, yea it's interesting that they are progressing to an actual sea trial for the system.

[mikmykWS]

Pretty impressive stuff

[Veracity]

Those things are just wicked! [X(]

[Gunner98]

This has been developing for decades, the main problem has always been packing enough power to be effective. There was a test in the 80's, which proved the theories but to generate the electricity needed, they would need a generator complex the size of a high school gym - not very portable! That problem seems solved. The next issue the y will have is the projectile itself. The reason that US Army tanks use depleted uranium (DU) long rod penetrators for the 120mm main gun is to achieve greater muzzle velocity, the tungsten darts literally melt at ~1800M/ps somewhat less than 3 x speed of sound, the DU round got more speed and therefore more kinetic energy. The MV's they are talking about are impressive, I'd be curious to know how they overcame (or plan to overcome) the friction issue.

B

[dillonkbase]

they melt in the barrel or in the air? how much heat is carrier by the projectile from the burning of gunpowder? Heat is the big reason we still use ammo with cases... but that's so the gun doesn't melt not the round?

[AlmightyTallest]

Well, the actual round has been in development for quite some time, some of the first images of it are in the video I posted, notice the heavy weighted backside with short stabilizing fins and very steeply pointed nose. It's also encased in a sabot that it sheds off after leaving the barrel as seen in the video.

In previous tests, the railgun had been using rounds shaped kinda like bricks. And ultimately, the rounds behaved like bricks too, tumbling out of control at Mach 6. The new round from Boeing is streamlined and mean looking, and if it can make it seven kilometers when fired at zero elevation, it's easy to imagine a 150 mile range in operation:

US Navy is on a roll, new laser weapons, railguns, fuel from Seawater... [:D]

[danlongman]

Now let me see...the NSA with drones armed with railguns. Security for the whole planet!
Just don't answer the fone. Or drive too fast.

[AlmightyTallest]

the NSA with drones armed with railguns.

Well, it's obvious what's in the pipeline. [:D]

[Gunner98]

ORIGINAL: dillonkbase

they melt in the barrel or in the air? how much heat is carrier by the projectile from the burning of gunpowder? Heat is the big reason we still use ammo with cases... but that's so the gun doesn't melt not the round?

In the air. As shown in the other post, the Sabot takes most of the heat and force of setback when fired, the key friction issue is air resistance.

[Gunner98]

The promo chart claims 8200 fps,
That's about a 1/3 rd increase in MV from a standard tank round. Impressive metlergy.

[mb4329]

The big benefit of depleted uranium over tungsten AP rounds is related to the properties of DU. It is pyrophoric, so any small fragments will ignite providing a incendiary competent after armor penetration. The other big advantage of a depleted uranium AP round is that when it fails under stress it does so in a manner that shears of the metal allowing the round to maintain a very small surface area which in turn allows for better penetration. tungsten on the other hand will mushroom at the tip increasing the surface area and decreasing penetration.

[AlmightyTallest]

Checking out their website it does have some interesting info:

http://www.ga.com/railgun-systems

GA-EMS has developed, built and successfully tested two railguns, the internally funded the Blitzer™ 3 MJ system and a 32 MJ launcher for the Office of Naval Research (ONR). GA-EMS also designed and built the pulse power supply for both guns and is developing projectiles for air and missile defense and precision strike.

GA-EMS is continuing the Blitzer family of railguns with a 10 MJ system designed for mobile and fixed land-based applications

Multi-mission capability – Railgun weapon systems employ guided, maneuverable projectiles which can accomplish multiple missions with the same round. Railguns can also fire a family of different projectiles with varying capabilities, levels of sophistication, and cost.

Flight profile is interesting:




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7Xh28hNRBQ

In the video above, the Boeing designed round is explained and demonstrated, but at the end he's talking about putting these guns on DDG-51's!!!!

And this news story seems to be showing a much larger round:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygHN-vplJZg

This overview shows the various capabilites, sure looks like they've done their homework with the testing, bore life measurements, plasma ablation wear etc.

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/53925417/EM-Railgun-INP-Overview

[orca]

I know it's years away but after reading about plans to test a one on a JHSV, in the future might it be possible to put a railgun on a LCS? Would it fit? If so where? Is there enough electrical production?

What about lasers?

[jdkbph]

With current technology, I doubt there's anywhere near the power required for a rail gun or any type of effective directed energy weapon available on an LCS. This may change of course, should my personal hope for "the next tech breakthrough that will transform the world" - room temperature super conductors - becomes a reality.

But that may be years or decades away... or it could happen tomorrow. Until then, we may be looking at, potentially, a future rebirth of the nuclear powered surface warship.

JD

[AlmightyTallest]

I don't know, according to General Atomics these railguns can come in different sizes rated by various energy classes.

They have an example of a land based mobile one that uses two trucks and some support systems.

http://media.ga.com/video-library/land-based-mobile-railgun/

I don't see why you couldn't replace the fore gun on an LCS with a small railgun system like the one in the video above, as long as the power requirements could be met.

From the photo below the space might be available for the capacitor systems and ammo below the origional gun mount.

[jdkbph]

That's a very cool video, but it's not real, is it? Where are they getting the power from? I can see maybe one shot every few minutes or so with a generator feeding some kind of capacitor, but this looks like something that may be a ways out.

Of course I could be wrong... [:)]

JD

[AlmightyTallest]

Well, from my experiences in the defense industry, if you advertise a product, the military customer usually is interested in the displayed characteristics shown in your ad. If you can't supply a product that matches what your advertising, you usually end up with a very angry military customer who could pull the plug on your entire project.

Going from the info in the other links, there's apparently two different methods of generating the power, one is a capacitor bank, the other some kind of rotating machines that is part of a pulse forming network to generate the pulsed power to send the round downrange.

Also, it's probably similar to smaller caliber weapons, in the sense that the truck mounted version is smaller, and uses less power, but can achieve a higher rate of fire. The goal of the system for all versions was to have a high rate of fire. The small version seems to be the 3MJ version, with the company literature mentioning the Truck mounted version being 10MJ and the Navy testing a 32MJ version, as well as the chart also seems to point to a 64MJ version of the gun.

In the video, the two large trucks on either side of the gun seem to be carrying the capacitor banks, with the ammo storage just behind the gun itself, you can see the cables going from both trucks leading into the weapon itself.


So probably different horses for different courses. Pretty neat stuff.