Re: Railgun Weapon for the Navy

[Damon Agretto]

I'd be interested in seeing how much energy this thing delivers to the 
target at 250mi compared to a Tomahawk. The advantage of putting a warhead 
on a missile is that it will do as much damage at point-blank range as at 
maximum range, because it is not dependent on kinetic energy to deliver its 
mission. This is one of the reasons why HEAT rounds were popular between 
WWII and the '80s: armor penetration was the same at ANY range (plus they 
were more powerful than KEPs)

Another problem I'd like to see addressed is that fast moving rounds could 
pass completely through a target (depending on density) without hitting 
something critical. Plenty of WWI biplanes came back riddled with holes but 
no critical components damanged. Similarly, Marine M26 Pershings in Korea 
were punching holes right through T-34s, but not knocking them out. Once 
they dropped the SABOT rounds and switched to back to AP rounds (which would 
explode inside the vehicle) they were able to get more satisfactory results. 
The British also had a similar problem with the 17lber until they redesigned 
the fuse to explode sooner (i.e. the round passed completely through the 
target before it exploded).

Damon.
- Original Message - 
From: Jim Sharkey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:28 PM
Subject: RE: Railgun Weapon for the Navy



 Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
Normally, new weaponry tends to make defense more expensive. But
the Navy likes to say its new railgun delivers the punch of a
missile at bullet prices.

 I'v eheard about this several times.  Every time I do, I keep
 expecting to hear the Quake III announcer saying HEAD SHOT  :-)

 Jim

 ___
 Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
 The most personalized portal on the Web!


 ___
 http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Railgun Weapon for the Navy

[Robert G. Seeberger]

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2007/012007/01172007/251373

Normally, new weaponry tends to make defense more expensive. But the 
Navy likes to say its new railgun delivers the punch of a missile at 
bullet prices.

A demonstration of the futuristic and comparatively inexpensive weapon 
yesterday at the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Dahlgren had Navy 
brass smiling.

The weapon, which was successfully tested in October at the King 
George County base, fires nonexplosive projectiles at incredible 
speeds, using electricity rather than gun powder.

The technology could increase the striking range of U.S. Navy ships 
more than tenfold by the year 2020.



[and a bit of video]

http://fredericksburg.com/News/Web/2007/012007/0130railgun



xponent

Dr Shockwave Maru

rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Railgun Weapon for the Navy

[Jim Sharkey]

Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
Normally, new weaponry tends to make defense more expensive. But 
the Navy likes to say its new railgun delivers the punch of a 
missile at bullet prices.

I'v eheard about this several times.  Every time I do, I keep 
expecting to hear the Quake III announcer saying HEAD SHOT  :-)

Jim

___
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l