US Navy test fires new "SCI-FI railgun weapon

[retiredgrunt45]

Hello "star Wars" for real. I would hate to be on the recieving end of this thing. Watch the video and have a look at the solid projectile, this thing would go through anything at that velocity, probably making modern tank armour seem like soft butter. 

Posted with usual disclaimers.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1239134/navy_tests_incredible_scifi_weapon/index.html

Navy Tests Incredible Sci-Fi Weapon

The U.S. Navy yesterday test fired an incredibly powerful new big gun designed to replace conventional weaponry aboard ships. Sci-fi fans will recognize its awesome power and futuristic technology.

The big gun uses electromagnetic energy instead of explosive chemical propellants to fire a projectile farther and faster. The railgun, as it is called, will ultimately fire a projectile more than 230 miles (370 kilometers) with a muzzle velocity seven times the speed of sound (Mach 7) and a velocity of Mach 5 at impact.
The test-firing, captured on video, took place Jan. 31 in Dahlgren, Va., and Navy officials called it the "world's most powerful electromagnetic railgun."

The Navy's current MK 45 five-inch gun, by contrast, has a range of less than 23 miles (37 kilometers).

The railgun has been a featured weapon in many science fiction universes, such as the new "Battlestar Galactic" series. It has also achieved newfound popularity among the 20-something-and-under generation for its devastating ability to instantaneously shoot a "slug" through walls and through multiple enemies in video games such as the "Quake" series of first person shooters.

The Navy's motivation? Simple destruction.

The railgun's high-velocity projectile will destroy targets with sheer kinetic energy rather than with conventional explosives.

"I never ever want to see a Sailor or Marine in a fair fight. I always want them to have the advantage," said Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Gary Roughead. "We should never lose sight of always looking for the next big thing, always looking to make our capability better, more effective than what anyone else can put on the battlefield."

The railgun's lack of explosives means ships would be safer, said Elizabeth D'Andrea, Electromagnetic Railgun Program Manager.

The Navy's goal is to demonstrate a full-capability prototype by 2018.

Video: http://www.livescience.com/php/video/player.php?video_id=080201-railgun

 

[geo]

WOW!

Beam me up Scotty!

 

[a_majoor]

New development in electromagnetic railguns:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/11/electromagnetic-railgun-air-defence.html

Electromagnetic Railgun Air Defence Test Fired Successfully

General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems division (GA-EMS) has successfully fired multiple rounds for the first time in a prototype of its new Blitzer electromagnetic railgun air defence prototype system.

These tests were performed at the US Army Dugway Proving Grounds under a contract with the Office of Naval Research. Testing is scheduled to continue through to the second quarter of next year and will culminate with the launch of tactically relevant aerodynamic rounds, GA-EMS says in a statement.

GA-EMS adds Blitzer will provide transformational, leap-ahead air defence capability against a number of threats for both naval and land-based applications.

With a muzzle velocity of more than twice that of conventional systems, Blitzer provides significant increases in standoff and lethality at lower cost without the need for propellant or high explosives.

Advanced Weapon Launcher (AWL) Systems and Technologies at General Atomics

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So can the internals can the heat at flying through the atmosphere at Mach 7? To hit a target at that range it will need guidance, I wonder if the GPS unit can handle the calculations at that speed to ensure a small enough target area?

Once they sort out the gun, then they need to sort out the ammo.

 

[a_majoor]

In the current form the rail gun will probably fire "dumb" rounds, something like a scaled up "ack ack" gun.

Guided rounds have been under development for a long time, especially guided tank munitions (STAFF, TERM, X-Rod), and mortar and artillery shells, and anti ballistic missile KKV's probably use much of the technology needed for guided railgun rounds.

Even in small calibre, proximity fused rounds like AHEAD exist, so smart railgun rounds will arrive when railguns become perfected.

 

[George Wallace]

At these velocities, do you need anything other than "dumb" rounds?

 

[helpup]

At these velocities, do you need anything other than "dumb" rounds?

I would argue that you most certainly would, especially as it is the navy that looks to be fielding it first and they have a tendancy or preferance to engage targets as far away as possible.  Even with high speed computers doing the computing for trajectory and a reliable weather pattern report over the horizon shoots let along a few hundred Km away would require preciscion.  Although if it was a LOS type shoot I get your point George you see it, shoot it, and it would be gone.  Didnt Coyle write about U.S  having them mounted on helicopters in some future war in Africa?

 

[a_majoor]

There are various railgun projects.

The USN is primarily interested in high energy railguns that can fire at targets several hundred kilometres away, projectiles which will need some form of terminal guidance since they also exit the atmosphere during their trajectory and must deal with the stress of re-entry.

The General Atomics railgun is much smaller and fires bursts of projectiles, and seems to be designed for use as an anti aircraft weapon. It is much smaller but would also benefit from having "smart" projectiles since the long, heavy barrel will be difficult to slew around to engage rapidly moving targets.

Navy warships seem to be a good fit for initial deployment since they have lots of power which can potentially be used to generate electricity (the HMCS Toronto has 70,000 HP available from the two turbine and two diesel engines). Large cargo jets might be good platforms for aerial railguns with lots of onboard space for systems and lots of power as well (up to date Boeing 747's generate 1000 kN [kiloNewtons] of thrust [@58,000 lbs thrust per engine]), which translates into a lot of energy that can be tapped to charge the capacitor banks as well.

Mounting railguns aboard smaller platforms like tanks or helicopters seems a bit problematic, given the much smaller powerplants, the energy level of a practical railgun sized for a tank or helicopter might not be much better than conventional weapons.