Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The 5,400mph superweapon: 'Star Wars' gun can fire shells at seven times speed of sound through
UK Daily Mail ^ | April 10, 2014 | David Williams

Posted on 04/11/2014 5:31:07 AM PDT by C19fan

A lethal new weapon that can fire a shell at seven times the speed of sound has been successfully tested on land. Described as ‘Star Wars technology’ by researchers, such a device has belonged solely to the world of science fiction for decades. But now it is close to a reality with sea trials on a US warship planned in two years.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: navy; railgun
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last
I wonder if this technology will mean a battleship carrying say twelve of these rail guns will be a viable weapon in the future. I wonder what the force one of these shells has compared to say a conventional 16 inch round.
1 posted on 04/11/2014 5:31:07 AM PDT by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: C19fan

I think the range of the shells to hit targets inland will be around 200 miles.


2 posted on 04/11/2014 5:34:29 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

Picture throwing a Volkswagen 100 miles at 5000 MPH. Then it hits something.


3 posted on 04/11/2014 5:35:04 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz ("Heck of a reset there, Hillary")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

With the proper projectile and that much kinetic energy I think it’s safe to say we nor anybody else has the armor to stop it.


4 posted on 04/11/2014 5:40:23 AM PDT by Dusty Road
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

Incredible penetration. More damage against armored targets, and less explosive damage against less-armored targets.


5 posted on 04/11/2014 5:40:47 AM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

Think of the force something comparatively small and light like a 50 cal. hits with at a fraction of the speed. Then multiply up.

Ain’t much that can stop the kinetic energy of a rail gun. Which is a way is a problem. Because depending on the projectile, it could simply slice through whatever it hits leaving a nice hole and keep on going. But I’m sure they accounted for that ;)


6 posted on 04/11/2014 5:41:23 AM PDT by Norm Lenhart (How's that 'lesser evil' workin' out for ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

It’s not the brute force, it’s the range and accuracy. I wonder how many global hotspots are within 200 miles of the ocean?

It may be the reason that there is less focus on cruise missiles.


7 posted on 04/11/2014 5:41:37 AM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lepton

Let’s test it on land some more.

North Korean land.


8 posted on 04/11/2014 5:42:35 AM PDT by Col Frank Slade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: C19fan
:: weapon that can fire a shell ::

I don't see the pragmatism of this weapon.


9 posted on 04/11/2014 5:43:35 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The Acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

The Star Wars description is really stupid. They use energy weapons.

You see railguns/mass drivers in The Last Starfighter, Wing Commander and Battletech.


10 posted on 04/11/2014 5:47:12 AM PDT by Azeem (There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

If I’m up to date on Newtonian physics, what’s the recoil like with something like this


11 posted on 04/11/2014 5:47:52 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (When I first read it, " Atlas Shrugged" was fiction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade

...and give the Chicoms a chance to reverse engineer this thing? I hope not!!!


12 posted on 04/11/2014 5:47:58 AM PDT by catfish1957 (Face it!!!! The government in DC is full of treasonous bastards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

Use the force Luke, trust the force.


13 posted on 04/11/2014 5:48:40 AM PDT by shadeaud (Be strong when you are weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dusty Road

The technology will be given away to level the playing field. We can’t have any advantage remember.


14 posted on 04/11/2014 5:53:11 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
It’s not the brute force, it’s the range and accuracy. I wonder how many global hotspots are within 200 miles of the ocean?

And how many of those hotspots will have land-based anti-ship missiles with a range > 200 miles, like the Chinese HY-4 variant of the Silkworm missile series?

15 posted on 04/11/2014 5:53:13 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade

Mecca.


16 posted on 04/11/2014 5:54:01 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

At Mach 7, the range will be thousands of miles.


17 posted on 04/11/2014 5:54:04 AM PDT by DownInFlames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

At Mach 7, the range will be thousands of miles.


18 posted on 04/11/2014 5:54:05 AM PDT by DownInFlames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

At Mach 7, the range will be thousands of miles.


19 posted on 04/11/2014 5:54:05 AM PDT by DownInFlames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

It is the reason every major military power is scrambling desperately to upgrade from large manned aircraft to smaller drones.


20 posted on 04/11/2014 5:54:45 AM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: C19fan
"I wonder what the force one of these shells has compared to say a conventional 16 inch round." Kenetic energy released on impact can and will be far more destructive, IMO. If you scale your velocity by a factor of λ, your Energy released on impact is scaled by a factor of λ2.
21 posted on 04/11/2014 6:04:25 AM PDT by ThomasMore (Islam is the Whore of Babylon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan
Only a media reporter would report projectile speed in mph or Mach numbers.

5400mph is 7920 ft/sec.

So how does that compare to other projectile speeds?

16”/50 battle ship projectiles - ~2700 ft/sec
.30-06 rifle bullet - ~2900 ft/sec
Rheinmetall 120mm tank gun ~5700 ft/sec
WWI German ‘Paris Gun’ ~12,920 ft/sec

So this rail gun is producing a 40% increase on velocity, compared to very high velocity modern artillery pieces.

It is a significantly lower velocity (60%) than the WWI Paris gun, which fired a projectile 10 times as large.

I'm not saying it isn't a great achievement, it is, but it is not producing unheard of velocities. The big plus is that it is achieving the velocities in a progressive acceleration curve that allows the use of on-board guidance, and it manages a total size and cycle rate that is tactically useful.

This has the potential to be the biggest development in naval warfare since nuclear submarines. I could see the reintroduction of armored ships, sporting rail guns and laser CIWS defenses. They would go in harms way without air support and put everything the enemy had within 300-500 miles of the coast in jeopardy (next generation 14,000 fps, guns).

22 posted on 04/11/2014 6:05:43 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames

Unless they are kicking the shell up out of the atmosphere, which I don’t think it is capable of, the range will be shorter, especially if they are relying on kinetics over explosives.


23 posted on 04/11/2014 6:09:07 AM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

Try getting hit with one. Heck, just stepping on it at night after the kids left it on the floor. Ouch!!!


24 posted on 04/11/2014 6:10:41 AM PDT by Teacher317 (We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: C19fan; Jeff Head

Ask Jeff, he keeps up with stuff like this


25 posted on 04/11/2014 6:13:58 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

The story I saw in NBC Monday night showed the explosive power of a 20 pound warhead fired at Mach 7. The engineer gloated this could hit an object 2,000 miles away w a velocity of 5,400mph and proper elevation.

Just sayn


26 posted on 04/11/2014 6:14:13 AM PDT by DownInFlames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

You funny guy.


27 posted on 04/11/2014 6:16:28 AM PDT by McGruff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

The last time I was on a Navy ship was 20 years ago. They carried antimissile defense systems then, I’m wondering how effective antiship missiles are now.


28 posted on 04/11/2014 6:18:15 AM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan; C19fan; dangerdoc; Jack Hydrazine; Col Frank Slade; Dusty Road; Cletus.D.Yokel; ...

I’ve discovered that the material I was referencing in my #22 had a typo (probably due to metric conversion).

The German Paris Gun velocity was ‘only’ 5400 fps, which negates, the point I made about conventional velocities that have been reached.

My apologies.


29 posted on 04/11/2014 6:18:58 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

The Navy should of just asked this guy.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d3_1395896476


30 posted on 04/11/2014 6:26:44 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames

I don’t have the math mojo to make the calculations anymore, but that seems rather optimistic, but I can’t prove it wrong.


31 posted on 04/11/2014 6:29:06 AM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

f=ma.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fnm-etchLOk


32 posted on 04/11/2014 6:30:50 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeronL; C19fan
The rail gun will be tested at sea in 2016, aboard one of the new Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV). Then presuming that is successful, and I believe it will be, it will be deployed on the first US destroyer in 2018-2020.



THE US NAVY'S RAIL GUN

This will be game changing technology for close-in anti-air warfare, anti-ship warfare, and fire support for ground forces.

33 posted on 04/11/2014 6:36:48 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

To be accurate, doesn’t the gun have to remain motionless? Or is there a guidance system? Even with gyros and an active suspension system, I don’t see how this could be accurate at long range.


34 posted on 04/11/2014 6:39:41 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames
The engineer gloated this could hit an object 2,000 miles

I'm not a rocket scientest but doesn't the curvature of the Earth come in at some point?

35 posted on 04/11/2014 6:41:04 AM PDT by McGruff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Once fielded, the only real defense will become placement of assets on reverse slopes, which will be impossible to hit (more so than standard artillery).


36 posted on 04/11/2014 6:41:59 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

and the guy in the zodiac pulls alongside the USN ship detonates himself and blows a 40’ hole .....


37 posted on 04/11/2014 6:51:51 AM PDT by zzwhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
The last time I was on a Navy ship was 20 years ago. They carried antimissile defense systems then, I’m wondering how effective antiship missiles are now.

We won't know for sure until they've seen actual use against hostile fire. Both missiles and land-based railguns (using stolen technology from us, you just know the Chinese and Russians have complete plans by now)

With regards to the railgun, if they've solved the issue of firing it wearing out the rails quickly, to the point where we can fire at least 100 rounds before the rails need replacement, this thing would be a game changer. A Mach 5+ projectile is harder to shoot down than a missile -- it will present challenges to enemy defensive systems comparable to hitting a ballistic missile warhead (and on the downside, will give a greater incentive for countries to develop systems which would then have the ability to defend against either railgun projectiles or warheads)

38 posted on 04/11/2014 6:54:19 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
Unless they are kicking the shell up out of the atmosphere, which I don’t think it is capable of, the range will be shorter, especially if they are relying on kinetics over explosives.

Using a trajectory calculator, if we neglect air resistance (which, I know, we can't, and it WILL be a big factor, but bear with me) a shell fired at a 45 degree angle at 7920 f/s (= 2414 m/s) would go 594 km, reaching a peak height of 148 km, which is above most of the atmosphere.

39 posted on 04/11/2014 7:07:00 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames

Nope. Air resistance will prevent that.


40 posted on 04/11/2014 8:00:37 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

And 594 Km = 368 miles. Throw in about 15 miles of air resistance at the start and 15 miles at the end and you get about 200-300 miles range or so.


41 posted on 04/11/2014 8:06:55 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

As to your question about recoil.

I describe a gun, of any size, at the moment of firing as a cube with one moveable wall. That moveable was is the projectile. Four of the five remaining immovable walls make up the barrel. The remaining wall is the breech.

To force the projectile out of the barrel the expanding gasses have to push against something - the breech. This is what produces the recoil forces you mentioned.

A railgun “drags” the projectile along as the magnetic current moves from the breech to the muzzle. There is no pushing the projectile.

When I first looked at this concept roughly 20 years ago the biggest technical problem was what to do with all of that energy when it got to the muzzle end of the track. The free release of that energy produced an EMP that you wouldn’t believe!

A railgun offers many tactical advantages. Ability to rapidly change the range. Increased load out. Increased safety. Reduced logistic issues. These are only the first order of magnitude improvements on our side of the weapon.

The impact at the other end of the weapon are VERY interesting. But, that’s for another post on a different venue.


42 posted on 04/11/2014 8:08:58 AM PDT by Nip (BOHEICA and TANSTAAFL - both seem very appropriate today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

I don’t either. Just repeating what was on TV. It’s way beyond me.


43 posted on 04/11/2014 8:28:16 AM PDT by DownInFlames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames

Theoretically, maybe. But I see problems with identifying, tracking & targeting at that distance. We’re still talking about a ballistic, dumb round here.


44 posted on 04/11/2014 8:53:54 AM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz
throwing a Volkswagen 100 miles at 5000 MPH

Wow! Finally, a worthy use for a Volkswagen.
45 posted on 04/11/2014 9:00:07 AM PDT by Delta Dawn (Fluent in two languages: English and cursive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

Not necessarily.

These weapons will also fire precision guided munitions which can use GPS, Infrared, etc. to hit both stationary and moving targets.

They are not powered in the sense that they have any kind of engine, but their control surfaces will allow them to manuever while airborn and hit the target.


46 posted on 04/11/2014 9:07:51 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

See #46


47 posted on 04/11/2014 9:12:32 AM PDT by DownInFlames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Must be a closely guarded secret how the Navy plans to ‘harden’ the electronic guidance system against the tremendous EMF produced by the rail gun, huh? Sounds like somebody might be selling the Navy a bill of goods when it comes to smart war shots for these rail guns.

The other technical problem is how to make the “barrel” of the rail gun last more than a few dozen shots. Haven’t solved that little problem yet, either.

I’m sure the Navy is working on solving these problems in parallel. But the delays can be expensive.


48 posted on 04/11/2014 9:32:13 AM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames

see #48


49 posted on 04/11/2014 9:32:38 AM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Just hope Obama does not hear about this - I heard they canceled the Tomahawk and Hellfire without replacements


50 posted on 04/11/2014 9:53:18 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson