Article

2004-06-23 Home Front: Tech

"Full power to the rail gun on my mark, and.... FIRE!"

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Domingo 2004-06-23 09:21|| || Front Page|| [11124 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 It's the turbine-electric drive system from the old Colorado-class battleships, 21st century version . . . on a ship armed with death rays!

How do you not love this?

Posted by Mike 2004-06-23 10:15:50 AM|| 2004-06-23 10:15:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 THIS IS SO SWEET, I THINK MY PANTS GOT A LITTLE TIGHTER.

Posted by Anonymous4021 2004-06-23 10:17:52 AM|| 2004-06-23 10:17:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Something for everyone to love...

The Greenpeace types ought to just love these, what with their improved operational efficiency, and all.

Posted by eLarson 2004-06-23 10:37:28 AM|| 2004-06-23 10:37:28 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 "Now all we have to worry about is dwell time: how long do we want to hold the beam on the target to get the desired effect?â Beach said.

from "defrost" to "parbroil" heh heh

A4021 - you worry me

Posted by Frank G 2004-06-23 10:42:51 AM|| 2004-06-23 10:42:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 It's that smoking hole in the water thingy.

First sweep takes out all electronics above board. Blinds anyone looking in the wrong direction. Two-three second sweep. Then you go to pin point targeting. Heh.

Posted by Chuck Simmins 2004-06-23 11:15:24 AM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2004-06-23 11:15:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Army is also working on thier own version to use on a tank platform. I haven't heard mention of them using it for indirect fire support. Could you imagine an artillery piece with a 250 mile range !?

Posted by Domingo 2004-06-23 11:18:34 AM|| 2004-06-23 11:18:34 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 electric hybrid tank? What hath Prius wrought?
;)

Posted by eLarson 2004-06-23 11:24:14 AM|| 2004-06-23 11:24:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 The magnet work is going on in my little town.

Posted by Shipman 2004-06-23 11:51:18 AM|| 2004-06-23 11:51:18 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Tanks with directed-energy main armament: ever heard of Hammer's Slammers?

Posted by Mike 2004-06-23 12:23:09 PM|| 2004-06-23 12:23:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 #4
I can't help it.
Beam Weapons.
Death Rays.
RAIL Guns.

They all get me EXCITED.

/me imagines Tungsten penetrator accelerated to LUDICROUS SPEEDS and gets warm and fuzzies all over.

Posted by Anonymous4021 2004-06-23 12:25:19 PM|| 2004-06-23 12:25:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 The National Academy of Sciences has a good website for future Naval tech. Be warned, its pretty thorough. The links of interest are at the bottom of the page. There is a link specifically for the Electric Ship with diagrams. For geeks only.

Posted by Zpaz 2004-06-23 12:25:52 PM|| 2004-06-23 12:25:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 On a serious note, doesn't this sound like it would become part of the ABM Shield?

Posted by Anonymous4021 2004-06-23 12:26:35 PM|| 2004-06-23 12:26:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 yeppers!

Posted by Frank G 2004-06-23 12:31:53 PM|| 2004-06-23 12:31:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 reminds me of an old george carlin joke, when he was talking about just who came up with the idea of a flamethrower,something like,
"I have somebody over there that i want to put fire...on."
in this case,
"I have somebody over there that i want to put millions of joules of energy...on."
I picture the effect to be something like "Mars Attacks!" Break out the popcorn!

Posted by Dripping Sarcasm 2004-06-23 12:40:16 PM|| 2004-06-23 12:40:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 âOur bottom line is that if we can put millions of joules of energy onto a target, something will happen.â

This sounds dangerously akin to the old, "if I hit the cue ball hard enough, something's bound to go in" sort of philosophy.

Reports detailing early prototypes of rail guns mentioned being able to move cannonball sized projectiles across dozens of yards with such speed that they merely seemed to suddenly "appear" at their destination without any detectable motion involved.

I have always maintained that SDI technology would pay off handsomely in both defense and spinoff applications. I enjoy America's strategic advantage and firmly believe that we should advance the destructive power of our conventional weaponry to the point where opposing armies will simply mutiny rather than face instantaneous death at our military's not-so-tender hands.

Posted by Zenster 2004-06-23 2:01:48 PM|| 2004-06-23 2:01:48 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Peace through Superior Firepower

"ack ack-ack ack"

Posted by Frank G 2004-06-23 2:25:12 PM|| 2004-06-23 2:25:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 The rumours about this type of technology are starting to resemble the rumours about the F117a in the late eighties, I think that the US might just have a little brandnew shining toy to play with.
Cool.

POPCORN!

Posted by Evert V. in NL 2004-06-23 2:41:35 PM|| [http://srv.fotopages.com/?o=935389&t=2] 2004-06-23 2:41:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 "if I hit the cue ball hard enough, something's bound to go in" sort of philosophy.

That is usually correct.
But then again
that damn cat died
before we could
run the test.
By measuring the kat we killed it.

Posted by abu Heisenburg 2004-06-23 3:04:40 PM|| 2004-06-23 3:04:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Tesla smiles from the grave...

Posted by borgboy2001 2004-06-23 5:13:26 PM|| 2004-06-23 5:13:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 one wonders what could be developed from this in the way of underwater defenses.....

Posted by Anonymous5352 2004-06-23 7:41:52 PM|| 2004-06-23 7:41:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 "ack ack-ack ack"

wimp, I'll help you on your verbage think ancient capital of Poland,

KRACKOW! KRACKOW! KRACKOW!

Posted by Shipman 2004-06-23 7:58:36 PM|| 2004-06-23 7:58:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 one wonders what could be developed from this in the way of underwater defenses.....

The rail gun would be in the submarine but it wouldn't be used to launch projectiles:

A very nearly flat-nosed object traveling at least 180 kmph could transition to a state of super-cavitation where almost its entire bulk exists in a bubble, thereby relieving it from the normal high drag of underwater travel. In practice, some venting of the rocket propulsion system's exhaust out the nose has been necessary in prototypes to enlarge the bubble to encase the entire object until sufficient speed is attained. Enormous strength is also necessary in the nose materials.

500 kmph torpedoes existed in the early 90s which required ejection at high speed from a submarine to enable rocket firing afterwards. It may be that future subs may contain something like linear accelerators to perform such ejections.

By 1997 USAmerica possessed super-cavitating underwater bullets achieving close to 5400 kmph, but of very limited range (12 meter underwater ranges are being discussed for mine-kills in 2000 AD).

One ping on the fish, maybe, if you're lucky.

Posted by Zenster 2004-06-23 9:16:44 PM|| 2004-06-23 9:16:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Projectile with velocity of Mach 7.5

You dont even need explosives, the kinetic energy is incredible! Even just putting it into the dirt will cause flashover and destruction for a decent sized radius - plus the sonic boom AFTER the round hits - they will not even know its there until after its on target.

And 6 to 10 a minute on target...

Posted by OldSpook 2004-06-23 9:19:17 PM|| 2004-06-23 9:19:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 This article casts light on the article about waning air power.

Most of the time, military technology and doctrine evolve gradually. But occasionally, there is a real shift in capabilities that comes out of left field.

While it's been nearly 20 years since the start of SDI, operational applications are pretty much "out of left field". We may find that the question of fighter jets gets solved by whole new classes of weapons. Directed energy is one such.

Swarms of smart, self-organizing missiles seem like they are more evolutionary that DEW, but the operational implications are pretty big and these programs are being researched pretty aggressively.

Posted by Robin Burk 2004-06-23 9:37:13 PM|| 2004-06-23 9:37:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Cruise ships have long employed electric drive because it is less costly to operate than more conventional propulsion

Lest we get too excited, the "primary reason" the Navy is adopting the electric drive is "fuel economy." The electric powered weapons are just gravy.

Posted by RWV 2004-06-23 10:25:10 PM|| 2004-06-23 10:25:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Robin, In the other thread you said there was a good case for an advanced fighter, presumably F-22 in addition to the F-35. Between the F-35, UCAVs and this and goodness knows what else, is there really a good case for the F-22? It seems like the USAF's Crusader.

Posted by Mr. Davis 2004-06-23 10:43:11 PM|| 2004-06-23 10:43:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Mr. Davis, I believe that there is need for at least one or two squadrons of F22s because it is ready now. The F35 (JSF not the Viggen) is off in the future and given the vagaries of big ticket weapon development has no guarantee of when or if it will ever be fielded. We don't need to fill the skies with the 700 F22s originally planned. Last time I looked, the planned number was down to 350 and headed South. We do however need 70 or 80 just to make it clear who rules the skies.

Posted by RWV 2004-06-23 11:44:29 PM|| 2004-06-23 11:44:29 PM|| Front Page Top

08:04 Arijit
07:29 Anonymous5555
16:09 Anonymous5483
12:56 Anonymous5478
14:43 Sam
14:31 Jen
11:20 Aris Katsaris
11:05 Frank G
10:45 therien
09:11 TerrorHunter4Ever
08:25 Mitch H.
08:16 Aris Katsaris
05:20 someone
05:14 someone
02:36 therien
01:22 Jen
01:03 rex
00:54 ex-lib
00:49 Jen
00:43 rex
00:36 CrazyFool
00:33 Jen
00:25 rex
00:19 Jen