/k/'s thoughts on rail guns?
Two more weeks!
>>64206835At least this one seems plausibleLong range shore bombardment seemed like a retarded way to use a railgun even 10-20 years ago when the USN was doing their testing
>>64206835The US Navy can use them to attack alien scrotums before they destroy the pyramids.
But seriously though, they'll be cool when someone works out how to shoot them as much as normal cannons. I think they'll be used like cruise missiles are used today, only slightly cheaper.
>>64206835ETC is better
>>64206835Cool but ultimately impractical, at least with our current technology, because of the incredibly high energy requirements
useless gimmick
>>64206871I don't know that it's energy as much as material science. My understanding was that pretty much all the components destroy themselves very quickly because of the inductive heating/arc flash/forces involved.
The japanese railgun being a 40mm projectile, makes it a lot easier to mitigate rail wear compared to the 155mm railgun the US was working on
>>64206835can't see a single purpose for it that couldn't easilly be done by a handful ukranians with cheap fpv-drones. The only people who actually want and really need this thing to work are the morons building it.
>>64206990I think the japanese want it for hypersonic missile intercepts as a backup up option in case your primary missile interceptor fails to intercept.> they would likely be used to intercept incoming anti-ship missiles—especially hypersonic cruise missiles, which are considered difficult to counter due to their high speeds. By leveraging the railgun’s high velocity and extended range, a layered air defense network could be established in conjunction with shipborne surface-to-air missiles.
>>64206967This.Power is a requirement, they can only be installed on ships that can support it (or ships designed to take them) but realistically its a secondary concern after the rails themselves warping and distorting after a few rounds.Can we make railguns that work? Yes. Are they cool as fuck? Yeah. Are they practical yet? No. As soon as they figure out how to stop the rails from degrading from putting 10-15 rounds through it, sure. Personally I'd like to see recoilless-coil assisted guns. A booster charge (the recoilless rifle) gets it going and then the coilgun part wrapped around the barrel accelerates it to ludicrous speeds. The gun isn't shaking itself to bits, you're getting a shitload of benefits without melting your rails, although i don't think the gains would put it at the same level as a railgun, you'd still be able to chuck a shell a lot further and faster than a conventional weapon.
>>64206990you need to go back
>>64206835Cool idea without a use. Missiles are just too dominant in Ship2Ship combat.
>>64207009Aren't coils specifically bad for HV because of inductance or someshit?
>>64206835>starts out as a way to make munitions cheaper >somehow MIC figures out how to make them like 10x the cost of munition that would do the same role
>>64207057To be fair, the MIC hasn't found a way to make them 10x the cost of anything since they don't exist as a fieldable weapon yet.
>>64206835my tax dollars funding a trash weapon
>>64207030My understanding (And I could quite possibly be wrong) of coilguns in general is that while they absolutely work you don't get the same performance curve out of a pure coilgun as you would out of a similarly powered railgun. On the other hand, coilguns don't melt their barrels every few shots.So if you're chucking 10 ultragigamegapetawatts into a railgun, you'll shoot further and faster than the coilgun you'd dump the same amount of power in, in addition to the railgun being mechanically simpler. On the other hand, coilguns work, they're cheaper and could -potentially- be used with hybrid systems that i was talking about before.There is absolutely benefits to using either system. However coilguns work -now-, but once the material science/metallurgy is worked out railguns will be better.
>>64207008yes, i see the naval or anti missile capability, yet again, why bother mounting a trillion dollar gun on a ship to protect from a trillion dollar missile system if you can't even defend yourself from 20$ temuucopters?i would throw in a guess and say for the cost of one functional railgun you could probably field ~1000 seababys and make your naval opponent life a living hell. A fucking liberty/freedom class can be disabled by a drunk serb with a blunderbuss in a rowboat, but sure, hypersonic missiles are THE threat. Tbh, i think the military techbros sold the military on the naval pendant of hyperloop (a train but modern, expensive and insanely impractical in case you didn't know.) I see a pattern here. Stop believing in the militaryindustrialist snakeoil my dudes, alway remember rifle is fine.
>>64206835Seems like the 21st century version of the pneumatic dynamite guns of the late 19th century, in that it's theoretically far superior to any conventional weapon of the era, but ultimately so specialized and difficult to maintain that it isn't really practical for battlefield use.
>>64207109Anon, the only expensive part about a railgun is the development.It's not like the rails are made of solid gold.The projectile itself is just a hunk of metal.
>>64207068I didn't know anyone from Japan would willingly come here.
>>64207120Capacitors are expensive (like 0.3 $/J) and have limited life (1000 cycles) for those with high energy density.
>>64207109Different countermeasures for different problems. If you're dealing with shit-tier drone swarms, you need jammers. If you're dealing with gucci drones that have fiberoptic cables or full autonomy, you need a laser turret. If you're dealing with a massive hypersonic missile that's fast enough and sturdy enough to hit you before the laser can get through its casing, you need something like a railgun to swat it down.
>>64206835Caldari are fags. Amarr Victor.
>>64207120>ah yes, superconductors, so nice and affordabletbf i have no idea what they are made from, but what i know about lorentz force might suggest gold is actually a substantial part of it. The idea of a railgun is over 100 years old, i don't think anoter 100 years will change a thing. I think it is cool in theory but just not practical.
>>64207109$20 temucopters already can't hurt ships
>>64207030>>64207079I believe you need very fast switching for very high currents for a coilgun to work effectively, because you need the magnetic field to be in front of the projectile as it travels down the barrel. If you don't time it right you wind up with the projectile passing through the field and getting heated by eddy current induction, or just having the magnetic field slow the projectile down. I also think the other issue is that the kinds of magnetic fields you want for a coilgun are very hard to just turn on and off. But don't know the physics of it well enough to be sure.
>>64206990>>64207109I didn't want to reply to you seriously at the risk of engaging with bait, but it seems that you have such a poor grasp on warfare that you have come up and said 'Yes, I know much better than the engineers who design and the service members who are operating on the frontlines with these systems. Why didn't anyone think of my genius idea?'Have you considered that drones are only used by the Ukies and ziggers because they are poor as fuck and neither side can establish air superiority? Even China who has touted their drone swarm spam as some game changing thing but also quietly has been acquiring thousands of guided rocket and laser based SHORAD because the drone meta won't last long.Warships do not operate anchored half a mile off a coast and no, the gay orgy zigger navy getting btfoed by Ukies is not an example to use. They're always on the move, shooting from OTH with layered detection suites. Your 'cheap fpv-drones' fall out of the sky with soft kill jamming or the battery dying 15 minutes in. If they make it that far they get fried by laser based SHORAD. Shahsneeds are lobotomized cruise missiles lumbering along at 100 mph with an impotent warhead the tenth that of one. Frogs, wops and burgers have all been shooting them with and without AHEAD ammo using the deck gun ever since they started getting used.Drones won't do jack shit to naval warfare for any competent force, even when used in conjunction with a strike by real AScMs or ASBMs. They'll be prioritized and neutralized with the appropriate SHORAD systems accordingly. Hypersonics are also a meme against a moving ship, but that's another topic.
>>64207185Oh boy are you sure about that? So by that Buyan class that got its Radar shwacked by a ukie fpv-drone in the sea of azov three days ago is fine, yes? No need for repairs, who needs these mission critical systems anyway, am i right? That specops tugboat that sunk yesterday in crimea must be alright then, too. just in submarine mode for a while.my man, please keep your childlike naivity and never grow up, you're so cute when you're in denial.
>>64207220have you seen the bullshit the US navy basically was forced to put in to service against their will over the past years? The engineers are not what i worry about, the people that employ them and bribe politicians are more to blame if you ask me. Dude just look at the germans 80 years ago. A box full of wunderwaffen, Tanks that could not be destroyed! the most powerfull abttleship and the most advanced jet fighter of WW2, all to be overrun by a horde armed with mosins.You got scammed and you are in to deep to admit it, same goes for the air force and most likely the army. Imagine that, with all their expertise, they wouldn buy a gun for their soliders with a deadly flaw, would they?Seriously, look at the last 30 years of military spending in the US. You guys are being scammed, pistol to VTOL, the whole spectrum.
>>64207322>'It's a scam!' 'Just cause I said so, alright!'You are a retarded boomer who listens to zigger sponsored reformers who think that throwing meat walls in the cheapest possible gear at a threat is a viable tactic. That lead in the gas back has really done wonders to your cognition.
>>64207296That didn't cost $20
>>64206835Railguns and their less capable sisters are cute.
>>64207079>However coilguns work -now-, but once the material science/metallurgy is worked out railguns will be better.When you look at the Navy's goals for electromagnetic weapons, it's pretty clear that no coilgun could achieve it.
>>64206835I can’t look at Japanese ships without thinking about how much I want to fuck Asuka
>>64206835Same as everything: fake and gay until the moment China says they built one at which point they'll turn into superweapons
>>64208471Isn't China already pretending to have a working one?
>>64208510No, they installed on in a ship but only for testing and research.One of the results was the problematic dispersion of projectiles at high speed after leaving the barrel, basically the same the US knew about their railguns. Physics is identical for everybody.
>>64208526Same reason why hypersonics are a meme
>>64208336Imagine a gliding railgun slug
>>64206835looks cool
>>64207009Mostly, this.Thing is, going for fully magnetic launcher is also meant to remove the need to store gunpowder inside.Personally, I'm wondering if full coilgun wouldn't be the final option.>>64207220While I agree that no cheap drone would destroy a -proper- navy, operating on high seas, simply because of the range & speed making it significantly harder, the point of cheap ammo is to overwhelm a target either up to destruction or while the costly projectile one-shoot the target.Forcing your opponent to filter the dumb shit that's barely guided to intercept the costly stuff that's actually dangerous.No one is going to give up micro-drones spam now that it has been proven to be so cost-effective. Those micro-drones cost sometime less than shells, definitely less than ATGM and the wired one, or ones with wired relay, do not give away their firing position.Forcing your opponent to require constant jamming using high level equipment is already a victory in itself, severely limiting their opportunities.>Hypersonics are also a meme against a moving ship, but that's another topicAnd that's just retarded of you. While their effectiveness is overrated, a moving ship is not going to dodge them even if they tracked the missiles from the moment it was launched.The point of those missiles is to get any tiny chance they can get to hit carriers that are basically irreplaceable during a war.What is a meme, is the belief that all our plans for warfare will hold up in a real war. Supposing we can even have one between superpower without the Nuclear Option becoming Nuclear inevitability.If I had to predict something, it's the rise of wingmen drones used simply to carry more missiles, with less chance of loosing them all in one hit, while also serving as expendable decoy. Future warfare will be about overwhelming the stuff that can't move, while avoiding a single-point failure yourself.
>>64210879>No one is going to give up micro-drones spam now that it has been proven to be so cost-effective. Those micro-drones cost sometime less than shells, definitely less than ATGM and the wired one, or ones with wired relay, do not give away their firing position.Forcing your opponent to require constant jamming using high level equipment is already a victory in itself, severely limiting their opportunities.That's why I said Navy specifically, drones are gonna be a much bigger headache for infantry who are trying to hold ground. Gonna take a lot of air and counterbattery to stop it devolving into a Ukraine drone scenario.I also already mentioned the obvious idea of using drones combined with AScMs and ASBMs and explained the counter for that. An ASEV can track 400 concurrent targets (publicly known, certainly much more classified) and so many cost effective layered counters already exist and are in the process of being fielded.>While their effectiveness is overrated, a moving ship is not going to dodge them even if they tracked the missiles from the moment it was launched.The point of those missiles is to get any tiny chance they can get to hit carriers that are basically irreplaceable during a war.A moving ship will do exactly that as 1) A very fast MaRV will not be able to get quality targeting data due to the plasma shield blinding all onboard sensors, forcing it to use low quality targeting data from a fragile kill chain, and if it manages to do that it has a very narrow cone of maneuvering that it will rip it's control surfaces apart if it strays outside of. 2) A MaRV slows down to use it's sensors and enters the optimal interception envelope of at least 2 different AD systems which have 70-95% effectiveness rates.If something costs as much or more than an interceptor but only has a 5% chance of hitting the target, with the remaining 5% being able to be intercepted at a 70% rate, it's a meme.
>>64207079>>64207188What if... Magnetically accelerated ramjet missilesRailguns make small things go really fast, coilguns make medium go kinda fast.You could shrink or increase the range on the projectiles by moving more of the energy expenditure to the launcher.
>>64211416what the fuck did i do to my formatting please kill me
>>64211009>A moving ship will do exactly that as 1) A very fast MaRV will not be able to get quality targeting data due to the plasma shield blinding all onboard sensors, forcing it to use low quality targeting data from a fragile kill chainComplete bullshit. The pershing II had a 1-2 meter cep becasue it was radar guided all the way.
>>64211457lul, how do you get the number off by an order of magnitude? It also slowed down to below mach 5 right after hitting the atmosphere. >The MGM-31C reentry vehicle housed a single variable yield (5-50 kT) W-85 thermonuclear warhead. With its Singer Kearfott inertial guidance system, and the Goodyear Aerospace active radar terminal guidance unit in the warhead, the MGM-31C achieved an accuracy of about 30 m (100 ft) CEP at a range of up to 1770 km (1100 miles). https://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-31.html
>>64211440No. You will live with the knowledge of your post as penance and a warning to others.
>>64211440I also fucked up my formatting while quoting the other anon cause his formatting was fucked, >>64211009 I think this thread is cursed lol
>>64206835Useless without shells
>>64211506>>64211515Must be the subject, thread is as cursed as railguns are.
>>64207116Ah, yes, I also enjoy Oceanliner Designs, anon.
