World's First Naval Experimental Railgun to Undergo Sea Trial

[VivaRevolution]

Unfortunately, it's Chinese.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-with-an-experimental-electromagnetic-railgun
https://www.popsci.com/china-navy-railgun-warship

Meanwhile in Murica:

http://www.businessinsider.com/china-testing-railgun-us-navy-2018-2

Yeah, so I think we had operational rail guns atleast 10-15 years ago.

I'm sure China had it prior to this as well.

Secret military tech can't be secret if we know about it.

10 years ago, it was all but officially confirmed we have mach 6 bomber jets. To this day they don't even admit we have mach 5 capable jets.

 

[Bald1]

Rail gun, railway gun, what difference does it make?

Your wife's on a train, or getting a train run on her, what difference does it make?

Come on now.

 

[Phr3121]

Man, you are beyond retarded. A rail gun projectile costs a fraction of the cost of a chemical missile, it has no heat signature, and travels so fast that it's impossible to intercept. Missile defense systems mean nothing to it, that's the biggest difference between it and chemical missiles.

Said the 'want-to-be-expert'. Do you know how much power/energy it takes to move that projectile? Do you know how much heat a railgun generates? Heat that damages the rails after it fires a few rounds. It leaves an infrared signature, so that is how it can be located and destroyed. Do a little research before you call people retarded.

"Although many arguments in favor of EM guns revolve around the assumption that greater muzzle velocity is always better, this is open to challenge. Parametric relationships between range, payload weight, and launch velocity show that this is not a strong argument for many suggested EM gun applications. For example, due to lower aerodynamic drag at launch, a slower but heavier projectile may actually fly farther than a lighter faster one, making the velocity limitations of chemical propulsion perfectly acceptable."

 

[Phr3121]

LIke I said, the advantages are speed, range (which open up options for use, including long range destruction of missiles) and lack of explosive propellant (and potentially lack of explosive warheads).

Check my post above #63. Heat is another problem. It generates enough heat to melt the rails. Not a weapon that can fire multiple rounds.

 

[Phr3121]

Just look at the power source arrangement for a railgun. Does that look practical? It is massive.

 

[Videer]

im questioning it, that thing is on a troop transport ship

It is a testing platform, that landing ship has enough space for the gun and all the other stuff needed. There is also few containers containing equipment that I assume is needed for operating the gun that are not quite visible from the pictures in this thread.

Man, you are beyond retarded. A rail gun projectile costs a fraction of the cost of a chemical missile, it has no heat signature, and travels so fast that it's impossible to intercept. Missile defense systems mean nothing to it, that's the biggest difference between it and chemical missiles.

Going very fast in the atmosphere generates a whole lot of heat.

 

[GhostZ06]

Just look at the power source arrangement for a railgun. Does that look practical? It is massive.

You know shouldnt you be happy about china taking the lead? You use to hump the shit out of the Chinese and Russian federation.

And yes it does look a prototype , its because its a prototypes.....thats obviously not what its gonna look like idiot.

 

[GhostZ06]

Yeah, so I think we had operational rail guns atleast 10-15 years ago.

I'm sure China had it prior to this as well.

Secret military tech can't be secret if we know about it.

10 years ago, it was all but officially confirmed we have mach 6 bomber jets. To this day they don't even admit we have mach 5 capable jets.

And we all but confirmed high KW lasers as well. We still have the margin, and i think we have the more advanced system, but it still embracing that we arent even ship testing this system

 

[Chesten_Hesten]

Unfortunately, it's Chinese.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-with-an-experimental-electromagnetic-railgun
https://www.popsci.com/china-navy-railgun-warship

Meanwhile in Murica:

http://www.businessinsider.com/china-testing-railgun-us-navy-2018-2

looks like Space battleship Yamato

 

[tdluxon]

Railguns are old news. We've moved on to solar guns. Shooting out a burst of the sun, incinerating anything in its path.

Seriously, Arnold had a portable rail gun in Eraser like 20 years ago

 

[n...not crazy]

Projectile weapons.... WHAT AN IDEA!!!

 

[Deleted member 457759]

I'm pretty sure America has had a real rail gun in testing phase for a year or two now.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

And it's amazing to me some of the ignorance in this thread. Rail guns are a major advantage even today.

 

[flashNsmash]

And it's amazing to me some of the ignorance in this thread. Rail guns are a major advantage even today.

yup, especially when your 'preferred' alternative is a circa-1975 subsonic harpoon with some updated guidance & attack profiles

 

[Phr3121]

And yes it does look a prototype , its because its a prototypes.....thats obviously not what its gonna look like idiot.

Idiot? When did you become an 'asshole'? I know it is a prototype idiot. That is why I posted it. Ah, as I recall, final production is not too different from the prototype. If you modify the prototype to a certain % you no longer have the same thing.

 

[Senkoy]

Said the 'want-to-be-expert'. Do you know how much power/energy it takes to move that projectile? Do you know how much heat a railgun generates? Heat that damages the rails after it fires a few rounds. It leaves an infrared signature, so that is how it can be located and destroyed. Do a little research before you call people retarded.

"Although many arguments in favor of EM guns revolve around the assumption that greater muzzle velocity is always better, this is open to challenge. Parametric relationships between range, payload weight, and launch velocity show that this is not a strong argument for many suggested EM gun applications. For example, due to lower aerodynamic drag at launch, a slower but heavier projectile may actually fly farther than a lighter faster one, making the velocity limitations of chemical propulsion perfectly acceptable."

The gun itself will generate heat, but not the projectile. Besides, like I mentioned, the primary advantage is that it travels so fast that it renders missile defense systems useless.

You also sound like you think these are replacements for chemical missiles. They're not. You use those when you want to fire multiple at a time. You fire a rail gun when you don't want it stopped.

 

[GhostZ06]

I'm pretty sure America has had a real rail gun in testing phase for a year or two now.

since 2006