PRC/PLAN Laser and Rail Gun Development Thread

[plawolf]

How would you assess penetration, accuracy, and ballistics in general, then?

For that, you need steel plates and blocks. I though you were just talking about stopping the projectile after it had served the purpose of its tests.

You don't need enough steel to completely stop the round if you are testing ballistics and accuracy for example. In which case you just need one plate as target, and the round could be stopped by a earth mound set up behind the target, just like a conventional outdoors weapons range.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

One clarifications folks, the rail gun and EMAL works on different principles.
Railgun utilizes the Fleming's left hand rule while EMAL I believe is utilizing Meissner effect with super-conductors and the effect of repulsion and attraction between magnets in which case brakes can be initiated much better with EMAL.

 

[jobjed]

One clarifications folks, the rail gun and EMAL works on different principles.
Railgun utilizes the Fleming's left hand rule while EMAL I believe is utilizing Meissner effect with super-conductors and the effect of repulsion and attraction between magnets in which case brakes can be initiated much better with EMAL.

I'm not sure how the Meissner effect has to do with differentiating EMALS from a railgun. To my knowledge, the Meissner effect is simply the locking in position of a superconductor within an external magnet field due to perfect cancellation of the magnetic field by the opposing magnetic field generated by eddy currents.
How does the locking of a superconductor within an external magnetic field lead to the launching of aircraft? I understand the basics of railguns, which is basically Fleming's LH rule arranged differently, and I was under the impression that EMALS and all electromagnetic motion for that matter follow the same rule. Is there another electromagnetic phenomenon that I'm missing?

 

[latenlazy]

One clarifications folks, the rail gun and EMAL works on different principles.
Railgun utilizes the Fleming's left hand rule while EMAL I believe is utilizing Meissner effect with super-conductors and the effect of repulsion and attraction between magnets in which case brakes can be initiated much better with EMAL.

But they will share a lot of similar subcomponents.

I'm not sure how the Meissner effect has to do with differentiating EMALS from a railgun. To my knowledge, the Meissner effect is simply the locking in position of a superconductor within an external magnet field due to perfect cancellation of the magnetic field by the opposing magnetic field generated by eddy currents.
How does the locking of a superconductor within an external magnetic field lead to the launching of aircraft? I understand the basics of railguns, which is basically Fleming's LH rule arranged differently, and I was under the impression that EMALS and all electromagnetic motion for that matter follow the same rule. Is there another electromagnetic phenomenon that I'm missing?

He's assuming that EMALs is using levitation. It does not. It's just a linear induction motor (still different from a rail gun though).

 

[latenlazy]

But they will share a lot of similar subcomponents.

He's assuming that EMALs is using levitation. It does not. It's just a linear induction motor (still different from a rail gun though).

Edit: Actually what I should have said is that they *could* still be different. I wasn't competely sure when I posted, but rail guns are a type of a linear induction motor.

 

[kriss]

One clarifications folks, the rail gun and EMAL works on different principles.
Railgun utilizes the Fleming's left hand rule while EMAL I believe is utilizing Meissner effect with super-conductors and the effect of repulsion and attraction between magnets in which case brakes can be initiated much better with EMAL.

I believe you mean EMAL is more like meg-lev train rather than rail gun cause I don't see the involvement of super-conductors (which is still a lab-only tech I believe?) in EMAL.

 

[GreenestGDP]

Tracking is not a problem for the US arm forces - the NORAD is tracking every object as small as the size of a coin in the earth's orbit, while NASA (NASA Orbital Debris Program Office) is also doing the same with its own set of sensors and tracking stations around the world. The USN itself (and probably the USAF, and the Pentagon) also have their own seperate tracking stations (and ships) and sensors from their own departments... ...

1) Those debris that NASA tracked can NOT DYNAMICALLY change their orbit.
Thus, NASA know their static orbital path, and NASA is able to tracked those debris
when they are passing continental US sky.

Please pay attention to this below ... ...

2) OTOH, GaoFen-4 can change their orbital coordinates anytime if PLA
see there is an interference.
GaoFen-4 will never venture above continental US sky.
How much time the opfor will spend to search the sky
on the Western Pacific, not above continental US ?
Opfor tracking devices are mostly located in continental US, not Western Pacific.
The opfor can NOT easily search the Western Pacific sky, looking for GF-4.

3) What about multiple dummy satellites that looks like GaoFen-4 ?
After spending so much time in searching for GF-4 ... ...,
If the opfor can find them, how do they know which is the real one ?
and, which is the dummy one ?

4) Western Pacific ocean is not calm as an inland lake,
what about when there are high waves on the Western Pacific ocean, ... ...
Can the opfor stabilize their Laser Beam Weapon platform,
long enough to achieve the required accuracy of 0.0000XX degree ?

5) What about Laser Beam Weapon Power Supply ?
Shining the moon Retroreflector from Earth needs a
minimum 1 Gigawatt (= 1,000,000 Kilowatt ) Power Supply.

At present time, the opfor Laser Beam Weapon
is using a Power Supply less than 100 Kilowatt.
Shooting distance is less than 1.5 km.
Opfor does not have the technology to produce a 50,000 Kilowatt
Power Supply that is small and light weight enough to be installed
on the opfor DDG.


Continue here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

US Navy's new laser weapon: Hype or reality?

Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Ultra]

1) Those debris that NASA tracked can NOT DYNAMICALLY change their orbit.
Thus, NASA know their static orbital path, and NASA is able to tracked those debris
when they are passing continental US sky.

Please pay attention to this below ... ...

2) OTOH, GaoFen-4 can change their orbital coordinates anytime if PLA
see there is an interference.
GaoFen-4 will never venture above continental US sky.
How much time the opfor will spend to search the sky
on the Western Pacific, not above continental US ?
Opfor tracking devices are mostly located in continental US, not Western Pacific.
The opfor can NOT easily search the Western Pacific sky, looking for GF-4.

3) What about multiple dummy satellites that looks like GaoFen-4 ?
After spending so much time in searching for GF-4 ... ...,
If the opfor can find them, how do they know which is the real one ?
and, which is the dummy one ?

4) Western Pacific ocean is not calm as an inland lake,
what about when there are high waves on the Western Pacific ocean, ... ...
Can the opfor stabilize their Laser Beam Weapon platform,
long enough to achieve the required accuracy of 0.0000XX degree ?

5) What about Laser Beam Weapon Power Supply ?
Shining the moon Retroreflector from Earth needs a
minimum 1 Gigawatt (= 1,000,000 Kilowatt ) Power Supply.

At present time, the opfor Laser Beam Weapon
is using a Power Supply less than 100 Kilowatt.
Shooting distance is less than 1.5 km.
Opfor does not have the technology to produce a 50,000 Kilowatt
Power Supply that is small and light weight enough to be installed
on the opfor DDG.


Continue here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

US Navy's new laser weapon: Hype or reality?

Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I like the idea of dummy satellites. It is a viable strategy that China can do right now, and something hard to go against for OppFor. The problem is cost, launching many dummy Sats to the orbit may be costly.

Point 4 is also good point; I don't know where you get the number of requiring 1 Gigawatt for Point 5.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Thanks for your reference It is excellent Any one dream of Laser Weapon should read this

A new savior: the fiber-based laser. Now, however, comes the latest new thing from the lab: the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, which uses optical fibers as a lasing medium, and which seems to produce much better beam quality while being easier to cool. Most encouragingly, the beam quality is reportedly not dependent on output power, which means that the small lab version could theoretically be scaled up to the higher powers needed by the military while still maintaining good beam quality.

Yet, many hurdles remain; in particular, some issues related to the structure of the fiber itself and the efficiency with which the photons are pumped up could be show stoppers. We will have to wait and see.

So, despite the present euphoria emanating from the tests conducted by the USS Ponce, caution is warranted. The tests were clearly conducted with a thumb pressed firmly on the scale. Most high power lasers still fail because they cannot get high power and good beam quality at the same time, while being within usable dimensions.

At the end of the day, good beam quality and good SWAP—size, weight and power—still determine the success or failure of a given laser weapon, and we’re just not anywhere near meeting all those requirements simultaneously.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[SamuraiBlue]

2) OTOH, GaoFen-4 can change their orbital coordinates anytime if PLA
see there is an interference.
GaoFen-4 will never venture above continental US sky.
How much time the opfor will spend to search the sky
on the Western Pacific, not above continental US ?
Opfor tracking devices are mostly located in continental US, not Western Pacific.
The opfor can NOT easily search the Western Pacific sky, looking for GF-4.

Of course it will not venture above US skies but not the way you wrote.

GaoFen-4 is a geostationary satellite in high orbit so it will always be above PRC skies.
It's not a spy satellite.
Moving orbits are more difficult then you think and requires a large amount of fuel, coordination so it doesn't hit anything else and is in a relatively low orbit which makes it expendable after four or five years since gravity and drag will eventually pull it out of it's orbit.