PRC/PLAN Laser and Rail Gun Development Thread
- Thread starter SinoSoldier
- Start date
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
How would you get them to be maneuverable? They'd need a seeker head (or at least guidance system capable of receiving updates from an external radar source) and moving fins, which means small parts and joints. The electronics have to survive the massive electromagnetic pulse of being launched, (which I think is akin to surviving an EMP weapon attack designed to take out electronics, not sure though) and the small moving parts have to survive the heat and speed of launch. I'm not sure if it can be done with current technology though I could easily be persuaded since I'm no expert on this.
I envision both naval railguns of different calibers and sizes, as well as large land-bombardment railguns that are ground based.
Naval railguns would have large 62MJ 200mm ones spoken in one of those Chinese papers, capable of engaging enemy ships at extreme ranges, and smaller air-defense railguns that shooti down enemy missiles with smaller calibers.
For ground-based land-bombardment railguns, they could be about the same caliber as the one we see here, compatible with extended range guided munitions. I could imagine the PLA deploying those to bombard Taiwanese targets across the strait, as they would be much cheaper in the long run, as well as more sustainable than ballistic missiles or even air-strikes.
Naval railguns would have large 62MJ 200mm ones spoken in one of those Chinese papers, capable of engaging enemy ships at extreme ranges, and smaller air-defense railguns that shooti down enemy missiles with smaller calibers.
For ground-based land-bombardment railguns, they could be about the same caliber as the one we see here, compatible with extended range guided munitions. I could imagine the PLA deploying those to bombard Taiwanese targets across the strait, as they would be much cheaper in the long run, as well as more sustainable than ballistic missiles or even air-strikes.
The things inside of the shell would be ok, such as inside a Faraday cage. The real challenge is they have to endure very high g and can still function. The navigation capability should be close to things like DF-17. I expect fins on today's missiles will not be strong enough
Here are some things about the "guided" part, mostly from American examples.
The package must fit within the mass (< 2 kg), diameter (< 40 mm outer diameter), and volume (200 cm3) constraints of the projectile and do so without altering the center of gravity. It should also be able to survive accelerations of at least 20,000 g (threshold) / 40,000 g (objective) in all axes, high electromagnetic fields (E > 5,000 V/m, B > 2 T), and surface temperatures of > 800 deg C. The package should be able to operate in the presence of any plasma that may form in the bore or at the muzzle exit and must also be radiation hardened due to exo-atmospheric flight. Total power consumption must be less than 8 watts (threshold)/5 watts (objective) and the battery life must be at least 5 minutes (from initial launch) to enable operation during the entire engagement. In order to be affordable, the production cost per projectile must be as low as possible, with a goal of less than $1,000 per unit.
The HVP is a next-generation, common, low drag, guided projectile capable of executing multiple missions for a number of gun systems, such as the Navy 5-Inch; Navy, Marine Corps, and Army 155-mm systems; and future electromagnetic (EM) railguns. Types of missions performed will depend on the gun system and platform, but range from Naval Surface Fire, to Cruise and Ballistic Missile Defense, Anti-Surface Warfare and other future Naval mission areas.
In general
The package must fit within the mass (< 2 kg), diameter (< 40 mm outer diameter), and volume (200 cm3) constraints of the projectile and do so without altering the center of gravity. It should also be able to survive accelerations of at least 20,000 g (threshold) / 40,000 g (objective) in all axes, high electromagnetic fields (E > 5,000 V/m, B > 2 T), and surface temperatures of > 800 deg C. The package should be able to operate in the presence of any plasma that may form in the bore or at the muzzle exit and must also be radiation hardened due to exo-atmospheric flight. Total power consumption must be less than 8 watts (threshold)/5 watts (objective) and the battery life must be at least 5 minutes (from initial launch) to enable operation during the entire engagement. In order to be affordable, the production cost per projectile must be as low as possible, with a goal of less than $1,000 per unit.
The HVP is a next-generation, common, low drag, guided projectile capable of executing multiple missions for a number of gun systems, such as the Navy 5-Inch; Navy, Marine Corps, and Army 155-mm systems; and future electromagnetic (EM) railguns. Types of missions performed will depend on the gun system and platform, but range from Naval Surface Fire, to Cruise and Ballistic Missile Defense, Anti-Surface Warfare and other future Naval mission areas.
In general
Not really. Unless you want a fire and forget solution midcourse guidance is unnecessary. The gun just needs a way of attaining precise target coordinates, and the steps needed to guide the muzzle is more or less the same as the steps needed to guide a round, if not simpler.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Meanwhile.... in the land of brave and free the program is going off rail
The $500mn investment resulted in two prototypes, evaluated since 2012, one by BAE Systems and one by General Atomics. Lavishly mediatized by the ONR, the weapons were reported by the Navy on July 2017 to be expected to “reach a capacity of 10 rounds per minute with a 32 Mega-Joule muzzle launch for each round” by 2019. The Navy envisioned in 2015 to be able to fit an operational gun on a ship by 2025.
Yet comprehensive research published on 4 December by veterans news website Task & Purpose revealed the next-generation weapon program to be threatened by a lack of funding and Pentagon’s changing priorities. As the Congressional Research Service reports, “transitioning military technology efforts from the R&D phase to the procurement phase can sometimes be a challenge” with many falling into “the “valley of death” between research and development and procurement.” The EMRG in particular faces issues with the gun itself, the projectile, the weapon’s electrical power system, and the weapon’s integration with the ship. And sources consulted by Task & Purpose hint the dreaded valley could be the US railgun final resting place. The designated main culprit is the Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO), a DoD department tasked with facilitating new technology procurement. Confronted with EMRG issues, the SCO realized in 2015 the gun’s super dense, low-drag tungsten projectile, called hypervelocity projectile (HVP) could by be fired by currently in-service Army and Navy large-caliber guns at speed reaching Mach 3, faster than conventional unguided rounds. The HVP would as well be “relatively inexpensive,” facing fewer development challenges and not requiring huge generators only the Zumwalt-class destroyer currently can accommodate amongst the Navy surface combatants without major overhaul.
The $500mn investment resulted in two prototypes, evaluated since 2012, one by BAE Systems and one by General Atomics. Lavishly mediatized by the ONR, the weapons were reported by the Navy on July 2017 to be expected to “reach a capacity of 10 rounds per minute with a 32 Mega-Joule muzzle launch for each round” by 2019. The Navy envisioned in 2015 to be able to fit an operational gun on a ship by 2025.
Yet comprehensive research published on 4 December by veterans news website Task & Purpose revealed the next-generation weapon program to be threatened by a lack of funding and Pentagon’s changing priorities. As the Congressional Research Service reports, “transitioning military technology efforts from the R&D phase to the procurement phase can sometimes be a challenge” with many falling into “the “valley of death” between research and development and procurement.” The EMRG in particular faces issues with the gun itself, the projectile, the weapon’s electrical power system, and the weapon’s integration with the ship. And sources consulted by Task & Purpose hint the dreaded valley could be the US railgun final resting place. The designated main culprit is the Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO), a DoD department tasked with facilitating new technology procurement. Confronted with EMRG issues, the SCO realized in 2015 the gun’s super dense, low-drag tungsten projectile, called hypervelocity projectile (HVP) could by be fired by currently in-service Army and Navy large-caliber guns at speed reaching Mach 3, faster than conventional unguided rounds. The HVP would as well be “relatively inexpensive,” facing fewer development challenges and not requiring huge generators only the Zumwalt-class destroyer currently can accommodate amongst the Navy surface combatants without major overhaul.
At least from public sources, the Chinese electromagnetic gun prototype was a coil gun. You can check out the barrel is circular not rectangular.
A coil gun faces other technical difficulties but the projectile is not touching the barrel; it is literally floating in the air. This reduces the worries on barrel durability. In a rail gun the current must run through the container of the projectile. In a coilgun there is no need for this container.
Due to language issues, the English sources only talked about "railgun", but were not clear if it is pure electromagnetic, or chemistry-assisted. The Chinese sources only talk about "electromagnetic gun", but offered no details if it is a rail gun or a coil gun. Maybe the two Navies are taking on different path this time.
A coil gun faces other technical difficulties but the projectile is not touching the barrel; it is literally floating in the air. This reduces the worries on barrel durability. In a rail gun the current must run through the container of the projectile. In a coilgun there is no need for this container.
Due to language issues, the English sources only talked about "railgun", but were not clear if it is pure electromagnetic, or chemistry-assisted. The Chinese sources only talk about "electromagnetic gun", but offered no details if it is a rail gun or a coil gun. Maybe the two Navies are taking on different path this time.
Last edited:
Looks too bulky for a 054 series size ship, maybe on a 052E?