So rumor has it that the chinks have developed a working rail gun and have mounted it on one of their transport ships.
>do you believe this?
>how do you think this will affect the south china sea situation if its real and works?
>what futuristic weapon do you think the burgers will unveil to 1 up the chinks?
>will we see rail gun combat when the korean peninsula kicks off?
Link (bad source i know): news.com.au
pew pew
Its a prop.
They cannot even make a decent jet engine.
This photo is staged af.
>do you believe this?
chinks can't build working escalators, they're going to build a railgun? that thing will blow up as soon as it's turned on.
Tesla death rays
This is what i assume to be true. Still, it would be nice to see the transition into tge futuristic warfare of my childhood dreams
I remember a chairforce user coming here in between two sessions of ERP on ss13 telling us how all those techky weapons fail the second they leave their clean confined lab and how sea water does a number on their hardware.
Meh the US has had them for years m8.
Thats led by darpa and skunkworks. This photo wouldnt have gotten out of china if it was truely a secret project. Its NK tier.
Even if it wasn't a prop (it is,) railguns are a long way from being practical.
I'm not sure what you think railguns actually do but they will have zero political impact outside of potential espionage incidents. Hell, I'm glad they're wasting money on developing gimmicks.
Yeah ive seen a million prototypes, i dont think ive ever actually heard of or seen one that would be actually effective in combat.
>diesel rail gun
So this is the unlimited power of petrol
>anything you can imagin-
teleporting to Arcturus Prime.
ZUMWALT
>how to spend more than our entire military budget on a useless hunk of metal
Problem with railguns and other weapons with similar ballistics is that you can't do indirect fire.
Burgers developed working railgun lot of time ago. IIRC it worked as well as conventional naval artillery in terms of shooting projectiles, but was extremely inconvenient on so many levels, from EMP blasting nearby electronics and to extremely low durability, that they preferred to forget about it.
Dont really know to be honest, i guess just the projection of force thrpugh a new type of weapon in the already dicey situation in the SCS.
Based on the article it seems to just boil down to >better because can fire larger warheads further.
I dont know if thats really the case or if the power needed for the electromagnets would mean the ship would lose put in other areas or whatever. Probably should have posted this to /k/
Hey chang
Nothing to worry about. Navy scrapped the railgun experiment because it's too costly.
>rail gun
whats wrong with regular guns? who cares about how the piece of metal gets accelerated?
Railguns can make the metal go considerably faster but require fuck loads of electricity
why would you want to make it faster? current canons on ships can destroy enemy ships with one hit if they use explosive rounds
Of course you can. Anything you can do with conventional ballistic weapons you can do with a railgun. It's a different method of accelerating the projectile, that's all.
In the article is mentions the benefit of not having to store the explosives necessary to fire the warhead (which i guess they think is dangerous) and that they have the ability to fire larger warheads. So i guess they forget that the warhead itself is dangerous.. seems like whoever wrote the article believes that warships sail around with the hold full of barrels of black powder which they feed into their cannons during a skirmish
In the 70s the west was deeply impressed by the Russian Mig 25... until they captured one thanks to a defector, examined it and realised it's capabilities were less than first thought and had some massive design issues.
The cost overruns and political duplicity in western arms manufacturing and acquisition have their equivalents elsewhere and the Chinese want to show everyone how clever they are - assuming it's functional as certain hysterical sections of press have done is idiotic.
>will we see rail gun combat when the korean peninsula kicks off?
1080p HD videos of chink battleships blasting the fuck out of things I hope
one advantage that came to mind is that there will be no recoil
but recoils only matters in automatic weapons,, so it's useless for the big guns that fire like 1 round / 30s.
Rail guns would be great for hand held weapons
So we wont be seeing the burgers demonstrate their rod from god weapon on the norks in the next few months? Fug :DDD
Railguns are hitscan weapons, conventional cannons you gotta get a bunch of kentucky windage on
Looks too small, it should be the length of the ship
Also this isn't anything new
This is what i was hoping.
>tfw no 4k livestreams of soldiers vaporizing enemy combatants with their personal tesla coils in my lifetime
>hitscan weapons
unless they fire photons, then anything they fire will drop to the ground at 9.3m/s/s
>make state of the art, cutting edge weapon
>put it on a transport ship
somehow i dont believe this.
>railgun, effective at what, 100km?
>missile, effecitive 1000's of km
wow, its fucking nothing
I dont think they could come up with a more jew name for a ship than Zumwalt.
Unless they named it Baumgreensteinberggold or something like that.
Americans should really lay off that jew cock, its embarassing.
>picture of the moment a shell leaves the barrel of the US navys rail gun.
Its implied it was popped onto the transport vessel because it has more space for the power generator required for the magnets to get whizzin. Theres a photo of 3 shipping containers strapped just behind the gun which people are speculating holds the generators. The ship also got a new control room and "sensors"
Can't understand how none of you get how rail guns would work. They're kinetic energy weapons, you accelerate a metal slug that weights 20kg to mach 7, it flies 2-300 km and then demolishes whatever hard target you were aiming at. This is for replacing cruise missiles used against small belligerent nations. You might also use it for anti ship work.
>what futuristic weapon do you think the burgers will unveil to 1 up the chinks?
probably hypersonic cruise missiles (ie boeing x51 waverider youtube.com
A 7 pound tungsten or depleted uranium projectile traveling at Mach 7 or so doesn't need to be explosive
If you're going to put in the R&D for magnetic propelled projectiles using them for something like that is beyond stupid. So yeah you can but literally why.
There is recoil you idiot. It's not a mass less projectile.
it just confers a shitload more energy is all at the price of extreme energy and material science needs. Being able to instagib things in seconds from far outside your previous range (and nigh unstoppably, unlike cruise missiles) is kinda nice though,
with conventional weapons almost all the recoil is caused by the explosive charge used to propel the projectile though, no such issue with a railgun (just a fuckload of barrel damage/shot from the heat)
>Why don't they just shoot pistols from the ship?
Railguns are a meme. Even muti shot capable ones can fire a few times before rails get so worn down that the projectile loses significant velovity
This. The kinetic energy of a high density object at those velocities more than make up for the lack of an explosive warhead.
Those things will annihilate anything on impact and even penetrate further than a conventional ballistic missile or cannon projectile.
Plus they're so high velocity that the accuracy over range means they can also intercept air craft, anti ship missiles and even conventional enemy cannon fire.
Rail guns are NOT a joke.
>what futuristic weapon do you think the burgers will unveil to 1 up the chinks?
they won't.
doesn't matter if the rail gun works or not. globalists want this country to fail so they can install a new world order.
doesn't matter if we have a secret space program full of alien technology or not. the globalists own it, and they probably own the technology China used for the rail gun.
fast projectile
cheaper than missiles
can carry more ammo than conventional weapons
If they have it was via stolen USA tech Israel sold to them
>the Ben Rich quote.
>not realizing that 60% of all black projects are bluffs to other countries to tie up their resources building shit that doesn't work.
>Not realizing that 20% is just money laundering to generals and defense CEOs.
Only 20% of all black project money goes into projects that have applications. And yes the Chinese have agents in those projects feeding info back to China. Hell we even have people straight out of China working on our top secret shit. Then we get components made in China shipped to America for these projects.
...
Kekd
That's a big Virgin water monitor that spills water to put out ship fire like the one that just sank an Iranian oil tanker ship near Shanghai
This is the Chad US Navy® railgun that destroys everything in its trajectory
There is a recoil force regardless when acceleration any projectile with mass.
It's incorrectly to call it recoiless.
hence why I said "most recoil" lel, you're correct though: there will absolutely be some recoil even without using explosive propellants
>zero political impact
Wrong. A couple of years ago China was calling out Obama's US gov for having railguns and they were afraid that they can be shot to pieces from 4000km away. This was in response to when the Chinese started saying their anti-Carrier missiles were the next big thing in their effort to out-Military the US. They were the ones making a fuss, and not the US.
>China reveals carrier killer missiles because they hate the USA
>USA reveals that they had working railguns, and that Discovery channel (was it?) footage goes live on TV
>China crybullies USA of distabilizing region
>meanwhile China closes down whole SEA fishing region
>latest examination of fisheries life in the region reveals a 90% drop in aquatic life in the region
>China blames it on the countries they police from fishing
With commies you LOSE.
Prior to that China had released tons of debris in space and was the nation that polluted the Earth's atmosphere with space junk. Rumors spread that they were going to try and flood the atmosphere with junk to shut down US GPS and other space based navigation in the event of war. Then the US fired a missile at one of their own satellites from an active use destroyer no less just to give China the finger and say they can do it to them too if they try.
China's been trying to dick rattle the region for more than 10 years now. Latest I believe before this railgun thing was the non-stop military drills beside Taiwan.
They keep accusing the US of having drills with political and economic partner countries for years now but you don't hear the US telling them to stop bullying Taiwan. Instead the news came out that Taiwan was conducting drills of potential sea and air based invasion.
Coilguns are effectively recoilless.
More like they got the key tech for energy conversion from a uk company they bought out during the 2008 gfc
Go home China you're drunk!
>Not making a floating Gustav that can be towed by other ships.
railguns have existed for over forty fucking years
are you fucking that stupid
did you know that we have literal lasers too?
literally get with the times
they're not used because they're inefficient
the only possible advanced to a railgun is that it can't be stop if aimed to hit
...
Does it fire fried rice?
>no recoil
>defying newton's law of equal and opposite reaction
Railguns have recoil just as much as conventional explosive propelled munitions do. The real benefit is the above mentioned of safer handling of munitions, variable velocities, and greatly higher muzzle energy at a huge cost. First and foremost is the action being tied to the ship's propulsion system. Energy made to move the ship is now tied to energy required to move the projectile. Second is durability and reliability. We have the ability to make powerful railguns but their longevity is questionable without further development and testing. (especially real world combat testing)
You must be pretending to be retarded.
Sure the recoil force will be mitigated by the sheer mass of the weapons platform itself (ie; 100,000 ton warship). But yeah, rail guns are sexy as fuck.
>pure magnetic propulsion
>shoulder moving recoil
I don't know you tell me you aboback
we have big plans
Don't talk shit about Zumwalt, he's a goddamn hero.
>These included orders authorizing beards (sideburns, mustaches, and longer groomed hair were also acceptable) and introducing beer-dispensing machines to barracks.
>But yeah, rail guns are sexy as fuck.
Okay, you are retarded then.
I understand el Goblino Americano.
Hahaha I loved generals
I like using a trainer so I can launch multiple nukes at my targets, the hell with only being able to launch one every 5 minutes or whatever.
Dont come in here being a hostile dickhead m8, we all know that railguns have existed for a while. This is an apparent railgun perched atop a chink ship, which is a new thing.
>what is a battleship
>what has been obsolete in naval battles since WWII and for shore bombardment since the invention of cruise missiles
they get even crazier when paired with precision guided munitions: baesystems.com
Supposedly the military decided that railguns are taking too long and just using these neat guided kinetic projectiles with normal cannons is good enough, hopefully they're right.
FYI, the massive acceleration and velocity of the projectile creates severe friction with air, so much so that it ionizes it into plasma (fire). So yes, there is an explosion and recoil from rail guns.
Just watch those Navy lab weapons test videos. It's fucking beautiful
what?
magnetic repulsion pushes equally in all directions. if you get two magnets one in each hand and push their repulsive sides together, does it only push back in one of your hands, or in both of them? one hand is the projectile the other is ship
Even a coil gun will pull a ship backwards towards the projectile that it is pulling forwards while it is still firing it
>they're not used because they're inefficient
They're not used yet because they break after the first shot.
>the only possible advanced to a railgun is that it can't be stop if aimed to hit
If they're fixed they would make the navy relevant again.
ideal in space maybe, line of sight. but using them with huge parabolic trajectories renders then less effective than missiles that are going similar speeds and can maneuver,
anyway, just waiting to see some ships get fucked up dont care how it happens.
I call bullshit until I see that shit fired, its "tits or GTFO".
when missiles that can fly mach 5-7 actually become commonplace (ie the Russian Zircon or US Waverider) you'll have a point, till then most missiles, especially the very long range ones like Tomahawk. top out at only a mach 2-3. The Tomahawk is actually subsonic ffs, it's very feasible to intercept things like that with an integrated air defense system. Railgun slugs on the other hand...
The US Army has a hard-on for ship-mounted laser weapons. The advantage is the ample supply of water to cool them with but the fatal flaw is that atmospheric particles of any sort impair the laser's power and shorten its range. Imagine having a weapon that can't fire when it's raining.
this, railguns are a meme
the massive amount of current passing from the rails to the projectile causes massive corrosion on the rails, so you only get a few shots before you have to overhaul. The current cannot be lowered.
You end up with a situation where the technology is technically superior, but you end up needing physically impossible materials.
you're not even taking into account the sheer energy needed
see you in twenty years when they fix one of only three of just these mentioned problems
We burgers have gotten pretty good at crashing naval vessels. You all thought it was just blind burger stupidity, but no, we're perfecting the art of naval ramming. Our founders loved classical greco/roman history, and rightfully so, we have been perfecting their naval techniques. Chinks won't know what hit 'em!!!
They're already in field testing on nuclear powered ships.
correct, we've given up on conventional railgun development to focus on firing aircraft carriers from enormous magnetic catapults. If we're gonna ram then we might as well do it in style.
>The coil pushes the projectile forward
>Induced field in projectile pushes the coil backwards
How do you not understand this
Better because the projectiles are simple and inert- no warheads, so you can have a very large number of non-volatile projectiles in store. They are also line-of-sight weapons, the projectiles travel so fast and straight you don't need to worry much about compensating for parabolic trajectory
Mfw Chinks coming to liberate me from da joos,niggers,feminists,LGBTQAP+, and other degenerates.
>guy has a mouse trap sponsor
Ok, just, ok
>anything you can imagin-
GIANT
SPACE
TIDDIES
>GIANT
>SPACE
>TIDDIES
Pic or it's not gonna happen
no.
4TH.
DIMENSIONAL.
MAMMARIES.
so, see you in twenty years
this will never be viable as more than a one off thing
at which point they're better off just making bigger cannons
with better energy use you can just make missiles faster anyway
this whole thing is retarded
like, just use very high bombers to take them out lmao
Yes it all makes sense now Obamas job creation program was to create 1000s of positions to man the rowers needed to power the rams.
4th dimension is time, right? So you're talking about perpetual mammaries, no matter where you go? Tell me more about this wonderful WMD!
My theory is they are the set of tits that fed the universe in it's earlier stage, literally, intergalactic MOMMY MILKIES
Mouse traps are kino, im guessing you dont watch mouse trap mondays on jewtube
youtu.be