Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Badd Brainz
10279 Followers
Russ Smith
18393 Followers
NewsMeBack
6468 Followers
Standing My Ground
4847 Followers
partrowFeb 11, 2012
Old, old story. And the photo too.
juliochavezFeb 11, 2012
The video says 12/2/10, so yeah not exactly breaking news
murxFeb 12, 2012
Yep, really old story since
Kristian Olaf Bernhard Birkeland
did build the first 'rail-gun' - http://www.plasma-universe.com/Kristian_Birkeland#Electromagnetic_cannon
back in 1902.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
drcrankFeb 11, 2012
I love the military logic of spending billions to save millions. :D
debasisgFeb 11, 2012
Shhh... Don't tell that to Rick Santorum.
ano233Feb 11, 2012
While I agree that switching to rail guns for cost savings seems dubious at best, the program isn't all that expensive, at least in military terms. From what I can tell only about $250 Million in r&d has been spent so far. Each prototype gun (three are supposed to be delivered by separate companies) only cost about $10 Million each for just the gun, power systems are provided I believe. When compared to the cost of your average navy ship (+$1 Billion) or modern jet fighter (~$100 Million) its not as obscenely expensive one would generally expect from the military.
user500Feb 11, 2012
the devil is in the details. An example is the round needs to be magnetic so on the cheep side it could be iron on the expensive side it could require rare earth magnets.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ano233Feb 11, 2012
The info I'm seeing says that the shell can be anything that can survive the G-forces from a standard explosive shell to a solid chunk of tungsten for penetration. The "Armature" is what actually interacts with the magnetic field and I think that is usually made out of some aluminum/copper mix.
darkfire79Feb 12, 2012
That and the technology could be used for other things once developed.. so it pays off in other ways.
trashbin67Feb 12, 2012
This is engineering R&D. The first one installed on a cruiser is going to be pricey. The "cost savings" aren't in replacing $2000 5-inch shells, it's in replacing $1mil short and medium range missiles.
jacleseauFeb 10, 2012
If they are able to combine this speed with some form of terminal guidance system, watch out!
xasitFeb 10, 2012
Its unnecessary. "Dumb" gunfire traveling at that speed which minimizes atmospheric affects effecting trajectory and the precision you can apply in aiming the gun makes it so.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bendvisFeb 11, 2012
Something I read several months ago said that the final plan would be to have the munitions computerized, such that they would be able to guide themselves to the intended target. It would be activated after basically being fired into sub-orbital space.
Edit, found the article and an image in it: http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/ORD_Railgun_GA_CONOPS_lg.jpg
elisevilleFeb 12, 2012
So, not only self-guided drones murdering for our U.S. Dept. of War, but self-guided railguns, also murdering for our government-industrial-military complex. No one will ultimately even need to push a button.
Human rights stand no chance against U.S. Imperial Authoritarianism.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
agmlauncherFeb 11, 2012
effects affecting.........
medallionsFeb 12, 2012
Hope they make a civilian model.. I'd like to try this puppy out on some deer.. :)
sleestakslayerFeb 11, 2012
PEW PEW PEW!
roundyFeb 12, 2012
I'm not sure if some of the commenters here are being sarcastic or not, but I just wanted to point out a few things.
This is not the kind of weapon that the U.S. would go to war over if developed by some other county. The railgun is not a weapon of mass destruction like an nuclear bomb. It's basically a very powerful cannon.
If the tech can be worked out, there are a lot of advantages of a railgun versus a conventional weapon. For example, the kinetic energy in the projectile itself is usually enough to destroy a target. In other words, the "warhead" doesn't have to be explosive. Just a mass impacting a target at Mach 7 will deliver enough energy to destroy the target. The advantage to this is mainly safety on board the Navy vessel. No live round being stored on the ship. Because the tech is basically all electric/magnetic, there are very little moving parts. Thus increased reliability and less maintenance.
The downside up to now has been developing the barrel/magnets itself and, more importantly, energy usage. Railguns require a lot of energy to fire a shot, at least one that can be of any use. It's taken this long for the defense contractors to scale up the batteries and other power systems needed to generate/store/discharge the energy required.
ka5p3rFeb 11, 2012
so next the u.s will rage war so they can test this thing
duncan202Feb 11, 2012
I'm not a fan of war... But this is still cool.
At least the US is still best at something.
dannykerrFeb 11, 2012
I love how USA can make whatever weapons they want, but if this was another country america would be ready to invade them.
protocol1Feb 12, 2012
darn right....
where are you located?
;-)
dannykerrFeb 12, 2012
England, i can see team america commented on this below. This is just my opinion, America just seems to throw its weight around so often then expects the rest of the world to follow them. I admit terrorists do pose a threat but the way we march into there countries and kill innocent civilians, this only fuels the hatred towards the west.
giyadFeb 11, 2012
weapons weapons weapons, then we fight for peace, and we complain that there is no peace... no democracy, no humanity... stop building and testing this s**t, actually i guess its too late for that everyone hates the US already.
jlodyga083Feb 11, 2012
In my book Heavens war the characters use rail guns . One draw back is the sonic boom that projectiles make leaving the barrel .
deminicusFeb 12, 2012
pff chicken cannon ftw. http://www.cbc.ca/75/2011/09/image-of-the-day-the-chicken-cannon.html
yazikFeb 12, 2012
So, once developed and deployed, what's an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) do to something like this?
ophelloFeb 12, 2012
Probably nothing.
cronic4Feb 12, 2012
yazik do you know what a Faraday cage is? EMP is weaksauce
ano233Feb 12, 2012
EMP usually only effects microscopic circuitry that can be overcome by the relatively weak electric overcharge caused by an EMP. Big hulking power cables as show in the video probably would register the increase in voltage as a rounding error, if they detected it at all. The only risk would be any computer control systems which are usually shielded/hardened anyways. Naval ships would have added protection as their hulls are usually a complete enclosed metal container. I've heard that even a car body is relatively effective a protecting the electronics from moderate EMP's.
cyberdactylFeb 11, 2012
Over 5,000 mph is indeed impressive.
rvm4Feb 11, 2012
Is the first one code named Ronnie Railgun?
gimiesomeFeb 12, 2012
A Ronny Raygun's Rail gun Code name Arrrg...
BrushTeethFeb 11, 2012
Bow & arrow is the most devastating weapon.
imayberight8Feb 12, 2012
Perhaps we should develop an Atomic Bomb big enough to crack the mantle of the planet and expose the molten core to air, resulting in a titanic explosion, no one on Earth will remember the next day. Like the one in Beneath the Planet of the Apes. End our human stupidity once and for all. Probably do the rest of the Universe a huge favor, eh. Rid of our destructive lot, what? Cost less than you would expect.....Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
thomsonrFeb 12, 2012
Google "russian doomsday device"
Mark_LincolnFeb 11, 2012
I am glad something more 'devastating' than the H-Bomb we tested in 1951. Sarcasm intended.