PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
Wrought said:
The program never got far enough for us to know those technical details.
Click to expand...
Theory of super long range gun is more or less known for a while. Bull wasn't single globe-level genuis.
It's just a tertiary mission set, that few are seriously interested in as to pay for it, with other, more available ways to do same job. If China is interested - I won't be surprised: US presence pattern in Far East just begs for it. Plus it greatly optimizes SRBM/MRBM use.
 
Wrought

Wrought

Captain
Registered Member
Gloire_bb said:
Theory of super long range gun is more or less known for a while. Bull wasn't single globe-level genuis.
Click to expand...

Theory, yes. But nobody has ever put it into practice, including SLRC. Whether you can actually rely on sustainer the whole way is completely unproven conjecture. It's at times like this that I like to reference Tipler cylinders. The theoretical physics of time travel via closed timelike curves is quite straightforward, you see: just take a neutron star and stretch it into an infinite-length cylinder spinning longitudinally at lightspeed. Easy!

xjwzaf7kwznd1.jpg
 
Last edited:
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Phead128 said:
I was thinking this exact scenario except 300mm MLRS beyond mid-point of strait onboard naval platform has entire Taiwan island within its range.
Click to expand...

Just bear in mind that ~80-90% of Taiwan's population (and presumably industry/military) is located within 30km of the Western Coastline.
So that is where the vast majority of targets will be.

That should be within range of a standard 400mm artillery round with GPS costing ~$40K
 
Last edited:
H

Hitomi

Junior Member
Registered Member
Long barrel Rail/coilgun, sabotted HE ammo, rocket/ramjet boosted, glide fins/hypersonic glider with optimised trajectory calculations refined by AI, might be enough.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Hitomi said:
Long barrel Rail/coilgun, sabotted HE ammo, rocket/ramjet boosted, glide fins/hypersonic glider with optimised trajectory calculations refined by AI, might be enough.
Click to expand...

Going hypersonic really increases the cost because of the materials required for the gun barrel and the projectile itself.

A rocket/ramjet boosted projectile also dramatically increases the cost because it just looks like a regular missile which happens to receive an initial launch boost at the beginning.

So I think if the 400mm artillery gun goes ahead, it will be for much shorter ranges for the Taiwan Straits (50-200km? range)
 
Temstar

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Hitomi said:
Long barrel Rail/coilgun, sabotted HE ammo, rocket/ramjet boosted, glide fins/hypersonic glider with optimised trajectory calculations refined by AI, might be enough.
Click to expand...
One of the trick I see people propose is if your supergun only ever fires guided rounds due to its extreme range, than there is no reason it needs to be rifled like traditional artillery. Using smoothbore like a giant version of a tank gun comes with lots of advantages like suitability to fire long skinny subcalibre projectiles with a sabot. The long skinny round is then basically a shortened MRLS rocket that got a 900m/s+ boost from the start rather than accelerate from 0m/s under its own rocket power. You then apply HGV tech to the tip and you're going to get crazy range out of it.
 
H

Hitomi

Junior Member
Registered Member
AndrewS said:
Going hypersonic really increases the cost because of the materials required for the gun barrel and the projectile itself.

A rocket/ramjet boosted projectile also dramatically increases the cost because it just looks like a regular missile which happens to receive an initial launch boost at the beginning.

So I think if the 400mm artillery gun goes ahead, it will be for much shorter ranges for the Taiwan Straits (50-200km? range)
Click to expand...
I am just meshing the engineering features with the purported range and it's feasibility. The financial viability will be up to the bean counters at procurement arguing with the engineers at whichever factory is building those guns.

Reusing the DF-ZF warhead can probably save on development costs and production costs. The sabot will act as a shock absorber for the initial propulsion forces and they can adjust the length of the rail/coilgun to match initial propulsion force to the ratings of the electronics in the warhead. Well at this point you have a mass driver that can launch stuff into space as well, how convenient.
 
Last edited:
E

enroger

Senior Member
Registered Member
Temstar said:
One of the trick I see people propose is if your supergun only ever fires guided rounds due to its extreme range, than there is no reason it needs to be rifled like traditional artillery. Using smoothbore like a giant version of a tank gun comes with lots of advantages like suitability to fire long skinny subcalibre projectiles with a sabot. The long skinny round is then basically a shortened MRLS rocket that got a 900m/s+ boost from the start rather than accelerate from 0m/s under its own rocket power. You then apply HGV tech to the tip and you're going to get crazy range out of it.
Click to expand...

Actually using coilgun to give the projectile an initial velocity before it's own rocket engages is a pretty decent idea, 900m/s goes a long way. If we're talking about 400km range, 900m/s boost may cut projectile mass by over 2/3rd.

This is the exact idea admiral Ma talked about in his omni-power warship(全能舰) concept.

My counter argument is that while it shaves off propellent mass, propellent mass is pretty cheap on its own so you're not saving that much money by adding this much complexity. It makes sense on a warship because space is premium in that case, not so much for land based application.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Hitomi said:
I am just meshing the engineering features with the purported range and it's feasibility. The financial viability will be up to the bean counters at procurement arguing with the engineers at whichever factory is building those guns.

Reusing the DF-ZF warhead can probably save on development costs and production costs. The sabot will act as a shock absorber for the initial propulsion forces and they can adjust the length of the rail/coilgun to match initial propulsion force to the ratings of the electronics in the warhead. Well at this point you have a mass driver that can launch stuff into space as well, how convenient.
Click to expand...

Financial viability against the alternatives happens at the design stage, which determines if a weapons system even gets built
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top