once these come on line, coupled with lasers and i don't believe air power as we know it can exist. i don't even think nuclear missiles as we know them can exist.
this is the kind of tech that if it is ever perfected will change the face of warfare.
Warfare doesn't remain static - if technology like this is perfected, new counters will be developed. I'd imagine that there would be an even stronger focus on SEAD - other possible methods might be a greater reliance on ultra-low altitude drones and cruise missiles, or a focus on broad-spectrum jamming. Air power is simply to useful in modern war to be abandoned.
Airpower is not going anywere. Even if somehow airpower was checked it would just morph into Gods Rods perhaps fired off a sized up X37 (the only thing holding us back is a piece of paper that doesn't even include all the nations it should specifically China).
Totally unimpressive. Company-produced videos always make their systems out to be invincible "game-changers". I'll wait until they have an actual functional system ready to go - with tests against threat realistic targets - to be impressed.
True that ,one example is counter battery fire ,its ben on the table for 50 or so years but when in the recent wars have we seen it work once. And even in this video the thing is as mobile as a warship on dry land more or less forced to be parked on airport or base way off potential front line. Plus when was the last time US air defense system hit something with above 50% rate (patriots in gulf wars were closer to 20%) add to that enemy that is actualy using jammers jot just your local jihadis.
Affordability will be the key. A system that large is especially slow and bulky would be vulnerable small teams with ATGW. the trick would be getting close enough undetected.
Most of the energy expended in railguns is into getting the projectile moving from zero fps. I'm wondering if a chemical propellant could be combined to 'start' the projective and the rail-gun accelerates it to the higher speeds. It would save on the power needed to generate the requisite velocity.
the video you posted has been taken down but this one: http://www.military.com/video/guns/naval-guns/general-atomics-blitzer-railgun/2176303687001/ seems to show air-burst capabilities which I believe to be impossible with current fuse technology. The things fly to damn fast that's the whole reason they depend on kinetic energy: current electronics would literally be obliterated by the forces involved.
Oh my
ReplyDeleteuh yeah.
Deleteonce these come on line, coupled with lasers and i don't believe air power as we know it can exist. i don't even think nuclear missiles as we know them can exist.
this is the kind of tech that if it is ever perfected will change the face of warfare.
Warfare doesn't remain static - if technology like this is perfected, new counters will be developed. I'd imagine that there would be an even stronger focus on SEAD - other possible methods might be a greater reliance on ultra-low altitude drones and cruise missiles, or a focus on broad-spectrum jamming. Air power is simply to useful in modern war to be abandoned.
DeleteAirpower is not going anywere. Even if somehow airpower was checked it would just morph into Gods Rods perhaps fired off a sized up X37 (the only thing holding us back is a piece of paper that doesn't even include all the nations it should specifically China).
DeleteTotally unimpressive. Company-produced videos always make their systems out to be invincible "game-changers". I'll wait until they have an actual functional system ready to go - with tests against threat realistic targets - to be impressed.
ReplyDeleteTrue that ,one example is counter battery fire ,its ben on the table for 50 or so years but when in the recent wars have we seen it work once. And even in this video the thing is as mobile as a warship on dry land more or less forced to be parked on airport or base way off potential front line. Plus when was the last time US air defense system hit something with above 50% rate (patriots in gulf wars were closer to 20%) add to that enemy that is actualy using jammers jot just your local jihadis.
DeleteAffordability will be the key. A system that large is especially slow and bulky would be vulnerable small teams with ATGW. the trick would be getting close enough undetected.
ReplyDeleteMost of the energy expended in railguns is into getting the projectile moving from zero fps. I'm wondering if a chemical propellant could be combined to 'start' the projective and the rail-gun accelerates it to the higher speeds. It would save on the power needed to generate the requisite velocity.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletethe video you posted has been taken down but this one: http://www.military.com/video/guns/naval-guns/general-atomics-blitzer-railgun/2176303687001/ seems to show air-burst capabilities which I believe to be impossible with current fuse technology. The things fly to damn fast that's the whole reason they depend on kinetic energy: current electronics would literally be obliterated by the forces involved.
ReplyDeleteA cannon round travels at 1,500 m/s with programmable fuses and a rail gun projectile can achieve today about 7,500 m/s. The Speed is 5 times higher.
DeleteTo reach these high speeds with the same acceleration the "barrel" length just has to be 25 times longer.