The companies making the rail gun technology have already developed version that could be used for 127mm projectiles.
US Navy DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class
- Thread starter Scratch
- Start date
The companies making the rail gun technology have already developed version that could be used for 127mm projectiles.
That's a great thought in principle perhaps, but I think this highly unlikely at this stage.
By Act of Congress the Iowas are being held in a certain stage of readiness, but that is more political and not really likely at this point.
The 1980s upgrade was very expensive and added Phalanx, Harpoons (x16) and Tomahawks (x32). But those are old box launchers for the Tomahawks which themselves are out of date.
No, to update all of those sensors, and then add more to accommodate the new large rail guns, along with the rail guns themselves, would simply be too expensive...and also very difficult.
Remember, you have to have a LOT of electricity to operate those babies and the existing propulsion/engine/electric system would have to be completely re-built to allow for it.
More tremendous cost.
At this stage, they would probably elect to build more Zumwalts instead...or build whatever follows it.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
and to refurbish a ship into that would cost $25 billion and more
I would imagined to generate enough power to have nine independent 16' rail guns on a single platform would require the energy output of a small city not to mention miniaturize enough to put on a ship even one as big the Iowa class... but yeah that would be one really badass vessel and truly an anti alien weapon systems if we're ever invaded by Decepticons or like those aliens from that 'Battleship' movie.
Jura The idiot
General
I believe that they will first test the rail gun aboard either DDG-1000 or DDG-1001, and that DDG-1002 may well be the first one that is actually outfitted to operate it in service.
As to this:
We already know that the initial at sea rail gun tests next year will be performed against targets on the ocean. They will, IMHO, quickly move forward with making those moving targets.
They can shoot at static targets all day long on shore already.
Time will tell.
As to this:
Article said:
We already know that the initial at sea rail gun tests next year will be performed against targets on the ocean. They will, IMHO, quickly move forward with making those moving targets.
They can shoot at static targets all day long on shore already.
Time will tell.
Jura The idiot
General
I have a dumb question
I can imagine peppering a coast with a rail-gun:
and I can imagine shooting it "point-blank" at an incoming threat ... but how are you going to use it against a warship at for example 25 nm maneuvering at for example 25 knots?? (I think this should be possible using Volcano ammunition with an IR seeker
It's not a dumb question at all, Jura, and you really answered it yourself at the end in the parens in your post, Jura.I have a dumb question
The same way we are preparing the munitions for the AGS, and the way Vulcan does it. The same way missiles do it.
You put the sensors on it that will allow it to do so.
IR detectors are one example. Laser guidance is possible (which means something would have to designate). There are others that have been micronized enough to pick up emmissions and home in on them.
Heck...you like the big guns on old battleships ships, right?
They hit moving targets miles and miles away did they not. Those types of basic calculations and firing solutions would work too...just greater range. But with a corresponding greater chance of missing too.
Jura The idiot
General
the last sentence actually summarizes what I was afraid of ... I mean assuming two km/s average speed of a rail-gun shell (or whatever it's called) shot to sixty kilometers (so that the values would be unachievable by any battleship ever built), it's half of a minute to travel ... if the target does 20 knots, it'll be about 300 meters ... and about the guidance, I wonder it the detector(s) would survive the firing (actually short-circuiting
... but I'm not saying they can't, just thinking aloud
Yes, and your fire control would take all of that into account...and today's fire control would be smart enough to factor in recent maneuvering and program in predictability algorithms to be able to much better indicate where it would be 300m later.
They factor all of that into the design. They can make them not only small enough...but tough enough...to handle the forces resulting from the rapid acceleration of firing.... and about the guidance, I wonder it the detector(s) would survive the firing (actually short-circuiting
Last edited: