PRC/PLAN Laser and Rail Gun Development Thread

[Hendrik_2000]

The problem is, railguns, like most guns designed for ballistic flight, are inaccurate. A mach 8 projectile versus a missile 100 km away is still going to take half a minute to get there, in which time the missile could have shifted position. There's a reason CIWS relies on volume of fire to shoot down missiles.

No it does not

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Mach 8=9800km/hr=163.3km/min So 100km/163.3=1/2 minute
But the fire control radar will adjust the firing angle of the gun by comparing the missile and the sabot

 

[Inst]

Against a maneuvering missile? Given the massive distances relative to trajectories, it's essentially impossible.

That said, the railgun vs Gauss gun debate is very interesting; it could easily explain why the PLA managed to pull an EM gun off while the USN failed. Gauss guns actually have higher theoretical performance compared to railguns, by the way, so it's more of a synchronization and cost challenge.

 

[Iron Man]

The problem is, railguns, like most guns designed for ballistic flight, are inaccurate. A mach 8 projectile versus a missile 100 km away is still going to take half a minute to get there, in which time the missile could have shifted position. There's a reason CIWS relies on volume of fire to shoot down missiles.

I don't think any rational person would try to pitch an EM gun as some kind of long range CIWS. That said, a target traveling a strictly ballistic trajectory (e.g. an incoming ballistic missile) flies a predictable arc, at least prior to its terminal phase, and could be attacked by an unguided projectile from an EM gun.

 

[Inst]

A maneuvering munition might be able to do the trick, but you'd have to miniaturize scramjets to achieve the job. There's also the question of keeping electronics working despite massive magnetic fields. Better to use EM missile launchers for the role instead of an EM gun, this is probably purely an offensive weapon.

Coilguns also promise far improved ranges over railguns; with a theoretical max speed of Mach 25, you could be able to hit targets 1200 km away, making it a viable anti-ship offensive weapon.

 

[ougoah]

The problem is, railguns, like most guns designed for ballistic flight, are inaccurate. A mach 8 projectile versus a missile 100 km away is still going to take half a minute to get there, in which time the missile could have shifted position. There's a reason CIWS relies on volume of fire to shoot down missiles.

Agreed CIWS is unlikely because they will only engage missile at a much closer range to maintain high intercept probability. EMG cannot have the firing rate to make it a CIWS that can effectively defend ship against multiple incoming missiles timed to hit at roughly same time. At most it'll destroying incoming missile at 10km or so and there's only a few seconds to hit all the missiles coming at you. Best application is bombardment or against other ships within 100km range. Who knows how accurate they've got it at this point. Maybe targeting ships is still out of the question. Launching missiles is another good application but with all said, EMG is more useful as a propaganda tool. The fact this is revealed shows us everything. Sure it may be a useful weapon and certainly an improvement to conventional guns and has great potential for future if developments continue. Revealing this is more to show the US and the international observer that China has arrived at a stage where it can compete with the big boys even on a military level .... many years ago.

 

[Inst]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Russians managed to get a coil gun to Mach 18, although at small scale and with a custom projectile. Basically, at this point, we need more detailed technical specs!

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Against a maneuvering missile? Given the massive distances relative to trajectories, it's essentially impossible.

That said, the railgun vs Gauss gun debate is very interesting; it could easily explain why the PLA managed to pull an EM gun off while the USN failed. Gauss guns actually have higher theoretical performance compared to railguns, by the way, so it's more of a synchronization and cost challenge.

How you think that typical Ak 630 hit a missile using radar control they compare the missile against the slug and adjusted the angle and fire again in a volley. They use a lot of small slug because it compensate for low energy of 30 mm slug
No missile is manuevring at 100 km they follow predicted trajectory

 

[Iron Man]

A maneuvering munition might be able to do the trick, but you'd have to miniaturize scramjets to achieve the job. There's also the question of keeping electronics working despite massive magnetic fields. Better to use EM missile launchers for the role instead of an EM gun, this is probably purely an offensive weapon.

"Miniaturize scramjets"??? LOL I don't think so. I have no idea why you think an already hypersonic projectile out of the muzzle needs any kind of extra propulsion mechanism to become maneuverable. All you need are sensors and fins, no miniaturization of anything required.

Agreed CIWS is unlikely because they will only engage missile at a much closer range to maintain high intercept probability. EMG cannot have the firing rate to make it a CIWS that can effectively defend ship against multiple incoming missiles timed to hit at roughly same time. At most it'll destroying incoming missile at 10km or so and there's only a few seconds to hit all the missiles coming at you. Best application is bombardment or against other ships within 100km range. Who knows how accurate they've got it at this point. Maybe targeting ships is still out of the question. Launching missiles is another good application but with all said, EMG is more useful as a propaganda tool. The fact this is revealed shows us everything. Sure it may be a useful weapon and certainly an improvement to conventional guns and has great potential for future if developments continue. Revealing this is more to show the US and the international observer that China has arrived at a stage where it can compete with the big boys even on a military level .... many years ago.

Huh? Destroying incoming missiles at "10km or so" is better than what a CIWS can achieve, so I'm not sure what you mean by "CIWS is unlikely". The best and technologically easiest application of an EM gun is definitely shore bombardment, with everything else being much harder to accomplish. But CIWS against non-maneuvering targets is certainly the second easiest mission to adapt the EM gun to.

 

[manqiangrexue]

How you think that typical Ak 630 hit a missile using radar control they compare the missile against the slug and adjusted the angle and fire again in a volley. They use a lot of small slug because it compensate for low energy of 30 mm slug
No missile is manuevring at 100 km they follow predicted trajectory

If they have no reason to, then missiles do not maneuver at 100km out, but if it was known that an enemy rail-gun could intercept them at that distance, it would be easy to program a gentle couple degrees of random sway during the whole trajectory and that alone would make the missile impossible to intercept at great distances by any non-maneuvering rail-gun shot.

 

[Inst]

Coilguns tend to have greater rate of fire, so coil guns might be able to do the intercept job. Yet it's ultimately a waste; i.e, it's a last-ditch effort when all other elements have failed, to put large coilguns as missile interception tools. The question is rather at what speed could you realistically aim to intercept with a coilgun. At Mach 7, you'd get 2 km / s, so you'd still have an appreciable delay even at 10 km.