PravdaMainForum...WASHINGTON — One of the prime attributes of the DDG 1000 Zumwalt-class destroyers is the design’s 78-megawatt integrated power system, able to switch electrical power between propulsion, sensor and weapon systems. It’s long been touted as the best platform to field new energy-gobbling weapons like rail guns and lasers. A year ago, however, it appeared the first ship that might carry a rail gun to sea might be a joint high speed vessel (JHSV) fitted with a temporary installation. Briefers at naval exhibitions spoke publicly of the plans, and at least one model of the proposed demonstration was on display.
Plans for the at-sea demonstration remain in place, officials said, but it’s looking more likely that a test using an expeditionary fast transport (EPF) — the new designation for JHSVs — won’t take place at least until 2017, if at all.
“What I’m finding is if I go ahead with the demo it will slow my development,” Rear Adm. Pete Fanta, director of surface warfare, said during a Dec. 30 interview at the Pentagon. “I would rather get an operational unit out there faster than do a demonstration that just does a demonstration.
“It’s not definitely off but it’s not definitely going ahead,” Fanta said, “primarily because it will slow the engineering work that I have to do to get that power transference that I need to get multiple repeatable shots that I can now install in a ship. And I would frankly rather have an operational unit faster than have to take the nine months to a year it will take to set up the demo and install the systems, take the one operational [rail gun] unit I have, put it on a ship, take it to sea, do a dozen shots, turn around, take it off, reinstall it into a test bed.”
Officially, the JHSV/EPF demonstration is still on the books.
“The plan to perform the at-sea demo in 2016 is still on,” said Matt Leonard, a spokesman at the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA). “Basically there’s been no change to the plan, but discussions are ongoing.”
www.defensenews.com/st
Zharkov:
A pure Rail Gun is an inferior weapons system except on two factors - they make less noise and rails are inexpensive.
The downside is that the projectile begins losing velocity as soon as it leaves the magnetic field that propels it, so they only work at relatively short distances, unlike rockets which can go as far as the fuel allows.
Combining the two ideas, a rail gun with a rocket projectile is effective. The rocket could have a slightly longer range due to fuel savings from a rail gun launch and if the rocket engine fired while on trajectory, there is very little chance of detonation on the ship launching it.
Anyone can make a toy rail gun with an aluminum or copper tube and a solenoid coil around the outside of the tube to launch iron nails. As a child, I used to make them myself for fun. My projectile was an ordinary iron nail with the head cut off. The pulse of magnetic flux propelled the nail into the core of the solenoid through which the tube was placed and when the current instantly cut off, inertia kept the nail flying through the air. Today, one could make a series of solenoid coils electronically switched to accelerate the projectile to higher speeds. But rockets remain a much better weapon for war. Rail guns require too much power and electronics to operate. The more complex the weapon, the less likely it will be reliable under combat conditions.
Edited by Zharkov
Biggus Dickus:
Jennie said::
"A projected naval rail gun with a 2.5km/sec muzzle velocity could deliver a guided projectile with an impact velocity of Mach 5 to targets at ranges of 250 miles, at a rate greater than 6 rounds per minute."
That kind of speed is not really sustainable through air. The source you evidently took this from, www.military....ilGuns,,00.html, does not mention that little limitation.