US Laser and Rail Gun Development News

Aug 24, 2017
me reservations LOL before I forget myself Feb 2, 2017
just my loose thoughts:

...

  • at the longest range: it's not easy for me to imagine shooting, at M7 or so,
    a metal rod almost 200 km up to the space :) so that it hits, at M5 or so,
    more than 400 km at some compound around which Ospreys then arrive, but it's
    an interesting idea;
  • at the shortest range, I don't know how a railgun is supposed to work in its CIWS role:
    would it shoot projectiles with a fragmentation warhead? or perhaps take advantage
    of its projectile's speed to slam it into an incoming missile?? (dubious considering evasive
    maneuvers but I won't delete it :) plus the advantage would be decisive only against subsonic missiles, I guess)
  • at the mid range (100 or so km), I'm completely at loss while thinking about anti-shipping fire:
    the railgun fire would need to be corrected, I guess by observing the splashes, by
    a drone with an EOTS or something, flying over the horizon, but if you're still with me,
    you can tell me why they wouldn't just shoot an AShM instead and did a mid-course
    correction since supposedly there would the drone in place, communicating??

...
... and more basic reservations are inside Railgun potentially cancelled: what went wrong for the US superweapon?
5 December 2017
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The US Navy’s railgun may never make it out of development as the weapon’s problems have seen it fall out of favour with the Pentagon.

The electromagnetic railgun has been in development for over a decade and has costed an estimated $500m, but according to recent reports from military veteran news outlet Task & Purpose, it could finally have the plug pulled on development.

The Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO), tasked with accelerating military technology’s development and deployment to the battlefield, appears to have fallen behind other priorities. While interest still remains in the hypervelocity projectile (HVP) being developed as the railgun’s ammunition, the project could be terminated as early as 2019. The HVP’s ability to be fired from conventional powder guns has won it preferred status in the SCO, as it would be more quickly transferable to current frontline operations.

BAE Systems and General Atomics were the main contractors to the US Navy to develop the railgun. Railguns are being researched as weapons that would use neither explosives nor propellant, but rather rely on electromagnetic forces to impart a very high kinetic energy to a projectile. The absence of explosive propellants or warheads to store and handle, as well as the low cost of projectiles compared to conventional weaponry, come as additional advantages.

In late 2013, BAE also received a $33.6m contract from ONR to develop and demonstrate a HVP – a next-generation, guided projectile capable of completing multiple missions for the Electromagnetic Railgun.

Railgun’s power consumption and degradation major stumbling blocks
The project faced two major complications. The weapon takes a colossal amount of power to fire, and it tears itself apart with use.

To date railgun demonstrations, while impressive, have not demonstrated an ability to fire multiple full power shots from the same set of rails. In a March 2014 statement, Chief of Naval Research Admiral Matthew Klunder claimed the weapon’s durability had increased from tens of shots to over 400. However, the ONR refused to confirm if these 400 shots were at the weapon’s maximum capacity.

The railgun’s power concerns are currently making it available on one new class of US destroyer. The problem is that the only ships that will be able to generate the 25 megawatts of power (enough to power almost 19,000 homes) required to fire the railgun are the Zumwalt-class destroyers, and only three will be produced due to budget considerations, down from the originally planned 32.

HVP preferred due to compatibility with conventional weapons
For a short-term solution to the railgun question, the navy has discovered it can fire the railgun projectiles out of conventional warship cannons. In 2012 the Navy fired the railgun projectile out of 5-inch powder guns already mounted on many US warships. The HVP has also been tested in 6-inch guns and 155mm Army howitzers. While it wouldn’t achieve the velocity in the EM railgun of Mach 6, it still travels twice as fast as conventional rounds.

The US is not the only country developing railguns. India, Russia, China, and Turkey have all tested prototypes.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Aug 24, 2017

... and more basic reservations are inside Railgun potentially cancelled: what went wrong for the US superweapon?
5 December 2017
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
More nay-sayers...and that is not surprosing.

Many of the people in these offices are hold overs from the Obama administration who wanted to, and in fact were responsible for holding up several US programs.

I know people working on the Rial Gun project and they indicate that they are meeting and exceeding demands and expectations.

It is true that the 155mm rail gun would only be installed on the ZUmwalts.

But smaller versions can be installed on other vesells including the new Ford carriers who have pletny of power for the CIWS versions of the weapons.

So we shall see what time brings.
 
in another thread Today at 7:49 AM
89417b5b5003c290930c775786876141-1.jpg

talking adding lasers on the ABs in the vid inside
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
while now I noticed

"The Navy also considered putting the weapon onboard an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer or America-class amphibious assault ship, but settled on the San Antonio-class after performing ship checks on the amphibious transport dock ship Arlington and other vessels to ensure they had enough space, cooling and power."

etc.: Navy’s next amphibious warship to get laser weapon
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The U.S. Navy will test a new laser weapon aboard the San Antonio-class amphibious ship Portland as early as this fall, the service’s program manager announced Tuesday.

The integration of a laser with the Portland (LPD-28) will be the first such effort since the demonstrations of the prototype Laser Weapon System, or LaWS, aboard the amphibious transport dock ship Ponce in 2014.

At this point, the Navy has no plans to put a laser onto LPD-28, LPD-29 or the follow on LX amphibious transport dock, said Capt. Brian Metcalf, the program manager for LPD-17 and LX(R).

However, depending on the performance of the system, it could be onboard indefinitely, he said during a briefing at the Surface Navy Association symposium.

“My guess is if this works and they like it, it’s going to be there for a while. The ship is going to go use the thing, and then we’ll start talking about how do we make this part of the ship’s total system,” he said.

“We’re very excited about it. It’s supposed to install while I still own the ship and am responsible for it, and then we would turn it over to the fleet for capability wherever the commanders decide.”

As the official tasked with managing the construction of the ship, Metcalf said he didn’t know the specific power level or capability of the laser, which is a next-generation successor to LaWS developed by the Office of Naval Research.

The program office is still awaiting drawings from ONR so it can finalize its integration plans, he said. However, it has already been decided that the new laser will be bolted on the deck, with it and its power modules fitting into the space usually occupied by vertical launch cells.

“It’s not going to be integrated into the warfare system. It won’t be providing tracking data or classification data,” Metcalf said, though he added that such integration could be possible in the future.

The Navy also considered putting the weapon onboard an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer or America-class amphibious assault ship, but settled on the San Antonio-class after performing ship checks on the amphibious transport dock ship Arlington and other vessels to ensure they had enough space, cooling and power. The program office is now updating those calculations for the Portland, he said.

“The folks that made the decision in the fleet and operational leadership were presented the options for each of those classes and in terms of timing and capability because not every ship fits the window for when the laser will be ready,” he said.
 
according to NavalToday Lockheed gets $150m contract to install high energy laser on a Flight IIA DDG-51 destroyer
The US Naval Sea Systems Command has awarded Lockheed Martin Aculight Corp. a $150 million contract for work on the Surface Navy Laser Weapon System, previously known as the Seasaber.

The contract will see Lockheed Martin develop, manufacture, and deliver two High Energy Laser and Integrated Optical-dazzler with surveillance system (HELIOS) systems by fiscal year 2020.

The two systems will be installed aboard a Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer and a land-based testing site.

According to a defense department announcement, this contract includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $942,818,114.

NAVSEA awarded this contract after issuing a request for proposal (RFP) on June 18.

The RFP said the High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) project is focused on accelerating the fielding of laser weapon systems to the fleet, with an incremental approach for increasing capability as laser technology continues to mature.

HELIOS is expected to field a 60-150 kW class High Energy Laser (HEL), along with an integrated Counter Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C-ISR) laser for non-destructive dazzling capability against UAV-mounted sensors.

Depending on the performance of the first two systems, the navy has options to order up to nine of the systems.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
noticed
General Atomics Awarded Army Contract to Advance Railgun Weapon System Technology
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

didn't say how much is that contract; anyone?
(would be interesting to see how seriously this activity is meant)
 
Dec 7, 2017
Aug 24, 2017

... and more basic reservations are inside Railgun potentially cancelled: what went wrong for the US superweapon?
5 December 2017
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
while now Navy 'Fully Invested' in Futuristic Railgun, Top Officer Says
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Following a flurry of reports in December predicting the Navy's $500 million electromagnetic railgun experiment was dead on arrival, the chief of Naval Operations told lawmakers this week that the death of the program was greatly exaggerated.

"[We are] fully invested in railgun; we continue to test it," Adm. John Richardson told the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense during a Wednesday hearing on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
budget issues. "We've demonstrated it at lower firing rates and ... shorter ranges. Now we have to do the engineering to, sort of, crank it up and get it at the designated firing rates, at the 80- to 100-mile range."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Richardson was responding to a question from Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, who expressed concern about the proven capability of the Navy's railgun weapon, which has yet to leave its test site at Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division, Virginia.

"My understanding is these weapons can fire projectiles at extremely high speeds with a range exceeding a hundred miles once fully operational," Ryan said. "I know China has demonstrated a capability for shipboard railguns, and I'm just concerned, again, that maybe we're falling short here."

Photos showing what appears to be a railgun mounted on the Chinese landing ship tank Haiyang Shan emerged in February. The evidence of what appears to be deployable Chinese railgun technology came to light following a handful of reports indicating the Navy's own gun development program was losing steam.

Business Insider reported in December that the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, which uses electromagnetic energy to shoot large projectiles at speeds of up to 4,500 miles per hour, to broader high-velocity projectile study.

The Navy has never acknowledged a loss of interest in railgun technology, however. Last July, officials with the Office of Naval Research told reporters that the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
over the summer, giving the weapon a range of 110 miles.

In testimony Wednesday, Richardson indicated the weapon had yet to reach that range in spite of predictions.

"That involves a number of technologies," he said. "The barrel itself is probably the limiting case, the engineering on that, the materials required to sustain that power pulse, and the heat and pressure that's involved in launching those projectiles. And we're doubling down on that."

Engineers have found the gun's barrel wears out rapidly when metal projectiles are fired at the blistering rates the railgun's technology delivers. Another unresolved issue is the power source for the gun; currently only the new three-ship
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of class of mega-destroyers is reportedly capable of supplying the electromagnetic charge needed to operate the gun. The Navy wants to deploy a version of the railgun aboard smaller-sized destroyers.

While Richardson acknowledged the challenges and said Navy brass were "very conscious" of reported Chinese achievements in railgun technology, he maintained the service was still invested in the program.

"As a benefit, too, of the program -- the railgun program, we have developed a projectile -- high-velocity projectile, which is actually usable across the fleet in a number of different applications, not only in the railgun," Richardson said. "And so, it's a very fruitful program that we continue to invest in."
 

Skywatcher

Captain
Doesn't make sense for the USN to test it at sea, there really won't be a warship that can carry it until the Future Surface Combatant (unless you want to do an expensive mod of the Zumwalts). So just work out the kinks on land until the mid 2020s.
 
Doesn't make sense for the USN to test it at sea, there really won't be a warship that can carry it until the Future Surface Combatant (unless you want to do an expensive mod of the Zumwalts). So just work out the kinks on land until the mid 2020s.
one more try after Yesterday at 8:16 PM
fanboish bunk:
The relative lack of power generation capacity on the Arleigh Burke class is one reason why the railgun at Dahlgren won't get sea trials for a long time.

Presumably, we should see a USN effort to test a railgun at sea once the Future Surface Combatant project goes into high gear (say, five years down the road).
while "Future LSC-class" is only planned for 2030+ according to the USNI News
Navy, Lawmakers Debate How to Best Leverage, Protect Shipbuilding Industry
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
Screen-Shot-2018-02-15-at-2.01.40-PM.png
"Future LSC-class" is only planned for 2030+ according to the USNI News
Navy, Lawmakers Debate How to Best Leverage, Protect Shipbuilding Industry
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
Screen-Shot-2018-02-15-at-2.01.40-PM.png

now keep kidding yourself LOL
 
Top