The Navy's Horrifyingly Powerful Electromagnetic Railgun Might Be Coming to an End: Report

[rangerrebew]

The Navy's Horrifyingly Powerful Electromagnetic Railgun Might Be Coming to an End: Report
Jennings Brown
Monday 6:07pmFiled to: military technology


For years, we’ve been sharing videos and images showing the destructive power of the United State Navy’s electromagnetic railgun. But we might soon be seeing the last of those horrifying GIFs.

Instead of using chemical combustion, the railgun fires projectiles using magnetic fields generated by enormous amount of energy. The superweapon is capable of shooting projectiles at 4,5000 miles per hour and hitting targets 100 miles away. According to military veteran news outlet Task & Purpose, the railgun, which has cost the Pentagon about $500 million since its inception in 2005, could be entering its twilight.

https://gizmodo.com/the-navys-horrifyingly-powerful-electromagnetic-railgun-1820991365

[thackney]

Horrifying???  Fantastic looking to me:

[GtHawk]

Horrifying???  Fantastic looking to me:

Of course it's horrifying to a liberal, but to Americans who believe that "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his", it's a beautiful thing indeed!

I'm still waiting for these bad boys!
! No longer available

[driftdiver]

budget cuts.  I wonder if lobbying by the ammunition manufacturers has anything to do with the decision.

[godblessRonaldReagan]

0.5 billion for something like this seems like a bargain to me.

[Idiot]

Horrifying???  Fantastic looking to me:

Cool!  I want one!

[driftdiver]

0.5 billion for something like this seems like a bargain to me.

Considering the amount of reseearch that had to go into it, it is a bargain.   Most new weapons systems are much more expensive.

[Cyber Liberty]

I think throwing this away is a stupid idea.  Moving away from chemical propellants to a mag-lev system is a real game-changer, as revolutionary as the rifle cartridge.

[Smokin Joe]

I think throwing this away is a stupid idea.  Moving away from chemical propellants to a mag-lev system is a real game-changer, as revolutionary as the rifle cartridge.

Especially when you consider a hit in the magazines won't blow up kinetic energy projectiles like explosive ones--and destroy the vessel.

If the HMS Hood had had a railgun, it'd be a museum today.

[Smokin Joe]

Considering the amount of reseearch that had to go into it, it is a bargain.   Most new weapons systems are much more expensive.

I like the idea of being on a warship capable of dishing it out, but where ammo on board isn't a threat to the vessel. Without propellants or explosive shells, if you're hit, there will be no secondary explosions.

[Joe Wooten]

I like the idea of being on a warship capable of dishing it out, but where ammo on board isn't a threat to the vessel. Without propellants or explosive shells, if you're hit, there will be no secondary explosions.

Except for fuel.......

[Joe Wooten]

Considering the amount of reseearch that had to go into it, it is a bargain.   Most new weapons systems are much more expensive.

That may be the problem, not enough gravy for the big contractors....

[Major Confusion]

budget cuts.  I wonder if lobbying by the ammunition manufacturers has anything to do with the decision.

Ya still gotta have stuff to shoot. 

[Suppressed]

budget cuts.  I wonder if lobbying by the ammunition manufacturers has anything to do with the decision.

Reports are that the projectiles developed for this program will be used in powder weapons.

[Smokin Joe]

Except for fuel.......

You'd purt'near need a reactor to push that sort of current. Which may be the problem, considering Hillary sold 20% of our Uranium to the Russians.

(Can you say collusion? I knew you could!)

[Joe Wooten]

You'd purt'near need a reactor to push that sort of current. Which may be the problem, considering Hillary sold 20% of our Uranium to the Russians.

(Can you say collusion? I knew you could!)

The new Zumwalt "destroyers" have plenty of power with a spare gas turbine generator set. I think about 40-50 MW worth. Though I do agree, an oversized reactor would be better.

[thackney]

You'd purt'near need a reactor to push that sort of current.

It does not require a nuke but it does require some significant power.  It would be unlikely to retrofit onto our older destroyers but no problem for Zumwalt class.  More ships are being designed that use generators and electric variable speed drives for propulsion, rather than direct engine to prop.

They have enough juice to charge up capacitors to deliver the burst of electric power for the rail gun.

...The ship's electricity comes from gas-powered turbines, which together generate up to 78 megawatts of power. Under normal conditions, the operating systems of the ship and the engines use only 20 of those megawatts, so the ship has 58 left over for weapons. Especially future weapons: Railguns and lasers, both long in development for the Navy, could find a home on board the Zumwalt, which has more than enough electricity to meet these weapons' intense energy demands....

Inside The Zumwalt Destroyer
https://www.popsci.com/article/technology/inside-zumwalt-destroyer
November 21, 2013

[thackney]

I like the idea of being on a warship capable of dishing it out, but where ammo on board isn't a threat to the vessel. Without propellants or explosive shells, if you're hit, there will be no secondary explosions.

Another advantage is a kinetic energy weapon is a lot harder to stop.  There is not an explosive charge to set off early before the strike.