Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Macabe

US Navy's Railgun hits mach 6

106 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

5,661
Alpha Tester, Members, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,413 posts

*********************

 

So, Thoughts on Naval Railguns? Also am i the only one who interpreted that the projectile's flight path could be altered mid flight.

 

Edit: Will be back in a few hours after class to discuss if there appears to be any interest.

 

edit 2: Here's the link without my opinionated comment

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/02/05/us-navys-new-star-wars-style-railgun-hits-mach-6/

 

 

 

[content moderated - non-constructive comment]

 

~GM/Mod Teams

Edited by Macabe
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
2 battles

Until they solve the issue of barrel wear, they are really just show pieces. I think if you could overcome that problem, they have the chance to totally reshape naval combat, to the point where we might eventually see the return of cruisers, battlecruisers, and potentially even some version of the battleship.

 

The other major sticking point is the issue of missiles -- but we are also seeing significant advancements in the arena of ABM technology. So if you were able to combine those two solutions, I think you'd definitely see a return of some heavier, gun-based surface combatants. Because, at the end of the day, energy and 'dumb' (or dumb-ish) rounds are a lot cheaper than jets and carriers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

Until they solve the issue of barrel wear, they are really just show pieces. I think if you could overcome that issue, they have the chance to totally reshape naval combat, to the point where we might eventually see the return of cruisers, battlecruisers, and potentially even some version of the battleship. The other major sticking point is the issue of super-sonic missiles -- but we are also seeing significant advancements in the arena of ABM technology. So if you were able to combine those two solutions, I think you'd definitely see a return of some heavier, gun-based surface combatants. Because, at the end of the day, energy and 'dumb' (or dumb-ish) rounds are a lot cheaper than jets and carriers.

 

Indeed, with such speed, it will be a issue unless they change it for now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

 

Getting a bit political in here...

 

Most likely, its best you avoid those topics and stick to the topic of railguns here.

Moderators and all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
128
[AYAME]
Supertester, Members, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
748 posts
8,341 battles

Another interesting alternative to the railgun is the FEL or Free-Electron Laser which is tunable over a wide spread of wavelengths; however, some of these projects have been delayed by budget cuts among other things even though the Navy has a bigger R&D program than other branches of the Military, or so I've been told.

 

http://www.onr.navy.mil/Media-Center/Fact-Sheets/Free-Electron-Laser.aspx

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/02/18/navy-breaks-world-record-futuristic-laser-getting-real/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

Another interesting alternative to the railgun is the FEL or Free-Electron Laser which is tunable over a wide spread of wavelengths; however, some of these projects have been delayed by budget cuts among other things even though the Navy has a bigger R&D program than other branches of the Military.

 

http://www.onr.navy.mil/Media-Center/Fact-Sheets/Free-Electron-Laser.aspx

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/02/18/navy-breaks-world-record-futuristic-laser-getting-real/

the concept is nice

That sounds like a interesting weapon, I hope it works out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
2 battles

You get more correct news from Fox News than all the liberal progressive news channels out there put together.

 

Naval Railguns have been out there for a long time now and in the last 10 years regardless of our liberal progressive presidents trying to cut as much form research and development in this area it is now able to go on to ships for testing.

 

Okay... I'm a conservative, but no need for this.
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
2 battles

Another interesting alternative to the railgun is the FEL or Free-Electron Laser which is tunable over a wide spread of wavelengths; however, some of these projects have been delayed by budget cuts among other things even though the Navy has a bigger R&D program than other branches of the Military, or so I've been told.

 

http://www.onr.navy.mil/Media-Center/Fact-Sheets/Free-Electron-Laser.aspx

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/02/18/navy-breaks-world-record-futuristic-laser-getting-real/

 

No over-the-horizon capability, which limits it really to point-defense. I do think it has a lot of potential as a secondary or tertiary weapon system on a '22nd century BB' to shoot down aircraft, missiles and small boats, but if we're going to see battleships ever come back, they will sport railguns and be able to threaten fleets and/or targets hundreds of miles away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
227 posts
99 battles

 

Getting a bit political in here...

Yes it is and it started with the very first sentence here.

 

*********************

 

So, Thoughts on Naval Railguns? Also am i the only one who interpreted that the projectile's flight path could be altered mid flight.

 

Edit: Will be back in a few hours after class to discuss if there appears to be any interest.

 

 

 

 

[content moderated - non-constructive comment]

 

~GM/Mod Teams

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

 

No over-the-horizon capability, which limits it really to point-defense. I do think it has a lot of potential as a secondary or tertiary weapon system on a '22nd century BB' to shoot down aircraft, missiles and small boats, but if we're going to see battleships ever come back, they will sport railguns and be able to threaten fleets and/or targets hundreds of miles away.

 

Indeed, though I'm curious about the size of those battleships, it would be interesting...I would guess a limit to 700 feet max.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
2 battles

 

Indeed, though I'm curious about the size of those battleships, it would be interesting...I would guess a limit to 700 feet max.

 

They'd have to be large enough for the fairly substantial power plant to support multiple rail guns/secondary laser turrets, as well as to remain 'on scene' off an enemy shoreline for a substantial amount of time. I'm guessing they would be decently large -- somewhere in the 30-35,000 ton range, which would put them right in the arena of the treaty BBs. You'll never see another Yamato or Iowa, but I don't think something on the scale of an up-sized Kirov class is unreasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

 

They'd have to be large enough for the fairly substantial power plant to support multiple rail guns/secondary laser turrets, as well as to remain 'on scene' off an enemy shoreline for a substantial amount of time. I'm guessing they would be decently large -- somewhere in the 30-35,000 ton range, which would put them right in the arena of the treaty BBs. You'll never see another Yamato or Iowa, but I don't think something on the scale of an up-sized Kirov class is unreasonable.

 

Sounds impressive overall, 35,000 is around 750 to 850 Feet in my opinion, considering the size of earlier battleships, which is acceptable. 
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
227 posts
99 battles

 

They'd have to be large enough for the fairly substantial power plant to support multiple rail guns/secondary laser turrets, as well as to remain 'on scene' off an enemy shoreline for a substantial amount of time. I'm guessing they would be decently large -- somewhere in the 30-35,000 ton range, which would put them right in the arena of the treaty BBs. You'll never see another Yamato or Iowa, but I don't think something on the scale of an up-sized Kirov class is unreasonable.

 

No larger than what we have now for all the room taken up by gunpowder will be converted to hold generators to supply the power, and the best part about it they only need about half the room that the gunpowder needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
140 posts
1,654 battles

My uncle Ken is in charge of this program! ([Removed his contact info]) i visited him in DC last year and we talked about it a bit, he even got me a railgun polo and lanyard :D

 

Edited by Tac_The_Gamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
2 battles

 

Sounds impressive overall, 35,000 is around 750 to 850 Feet in my opinion, considering the size of earlier battleships, which is acceptable.

 

Keep in mind that the Zumwalts are approaching battleship size, being only 4,000 tons lighter than HMS Dreadnought (and are actually longer, and nearly as broad). 30,000 tons would be modest, but I think it would get the job done (and it would keep costs and crew compliment limited, which would allow the thing to be built).
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

 

Keep in mind that the Zumwalts are approaching battleship size, being only 4,000 tons lighter than HMS Dreadnought (and are actually longer, and nearly as broad). 30,000 tons would be modest, but I think it would get the job done (and it would keep costs and crew compliment limited, which would allow the thing to be built).

 

I'm comparing 35,000 to some smaller classes...and I thought the Zumwalts were closer to Heavy Cruisers...though I compare the Zumwalt to the heaviest of cruisers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
364
[7CR]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
782 posts
2,818 battles

I got a chuckle out of the author...

 

"Ballet dancer turned defense specialist Allison Barrie has traveled around the world covering the military, terrorism, weapons advancements and life on the front line. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
2 battles

 

I'm comparing 35,000 to some smaller classes...and I thought the Zumwalts were closer to Heavy Cruisers...though I compare the Zumwalt to the heaviest of cruisers.

 

I don't, if only because we were supposed to get cruiser variants until they were cancelled. For me, the Zums are just big destroyers. I sure as hell wish we'd build new cruisers, as it irks me to no end that the Ticonderogas are now expected to fulfill that role until the 2040s, and are themselves little more than glorified DDs. Cruiser means MEAT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

I got a chuckle out of the author...

 

"Ballet dancer turned defense specialist Allison Barrie has traveled around the world covering the military, terrorism, weapons advancements and life on the front line. "

 

That is quite the amusing line in my opinion...a bit of humour from the author's half. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
140 posts
1,654 battles

 

That is such a interesting thing to have...what is it like overall with your Uncle? 

 

hes a really cool guy, +30 years in the navy have been good for him. he takes his work very serosily but he'll still chill and watch a football game with ya lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

 

hes a really cool guy, +30 years in the navy have been good for him. he takes his work very serosily but he'll still chill and watch a football game with ya lol

 

Sounds like a amazing uncle you have there :) nice 

 

I don't, if only because we were supposed to get cruiser variants until they were cancelled. For me, the Zums are just big destroyers. I sure as hell wish we'd build new cruisers, as it irks me to no end that the Ticonderogas are now expected to fulfill that role until the 2040s, and are themselves little more than glorified DDs. Cruiser means MEAT.

 

I can agree...Cruisers can still play a role in the modern battle field 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,315 posts
27,013 battles

Wow that name Zumwalt sounds familiar to me. That was the admiral who allowed us to have longer hair and sideburns back in the late 60s and early 70s during the cold war. Man I must be getting old? Also FOX news at least tells me the truth about what is really going within our nation.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
476
[GNSQD]
Alpha Tester
2,746 posts
2,246 battles

Wow that name Zumwalt sounds familiar to me. That was the admiral who allowed us to have longer hair and sideburns back in the late 60s and early 70s during the cold war. Man I must be getting old? Also FOX news at least tells me the truth about what is really going within our nation.

 

I think Zumwalt was the one that pushed for the replacement of WWII-era vessels as the Chief of Naval Operations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×