Photos Suggest China Might Have a Hypersonic Railgun

DigitalGriffin said:
Even though there's sonobouys, radar, sonar, and satellite tracking, it's still easy to lose a ship. That's especially true if it's a sub.

Nothing worse then getting caught with your pants down.
Click to expand...

Wait, so your point is if your ambushed then your likely to lose? Oh I've missed you Captain Obvious ;).

My question is what does that have to do with a railgun?
 
Aireoth said:
Wait, so your point is if your ambushed then your likely to lose? Oh I've missed you Captain Obvious ;).

My question is what does that have to do with a railgun?
Click to expand...

Tsumi was making the point that modern navies don't have to get close to the enemy, thus being out of reasonable range to weapons like a railgun. My argument is "You can't always know where your enemy is"
 
quickly USA! throw all that money you don't have at military contractors
 
DigitalGriffin said:
Tsumi was making the point that modern navies don't have to get close to the enemy, thus being out of reasonable range to weapons like a railgun. My argument is "You can't always know where your enemy is"
Click to expand...

Which doesn't mean anything. The Rail gun is not designed to engage ships. it's designed for fire support on shore targets deeper inland than conventional guns can reach.

Edit:that didn't come out the way I intended at all, the PRIMARY mission is fire support, it obviously could punch nice holes in ships to, under the right circumstances.
 
Last edited:
DigitalGriffin said:
Tsumi was making the point that modern navies don't have to get close to the enemy, thus being out of reasonable range to weapons like a railgun. My argument is "You can't always know where your enemy is"
Click to expand...

A submarine sure as hell can't launch a railgun. Small ships cannot support a railgun. Only a larger surface ship, which means greater detectability and diminished chances of a successful ambush, or land-based installations, again easily detectable, can use railguns. The original post I quoted was on the subject of using railguns to sink carriers, not every tactic and weapons system available to man.
 
Tsumi said:
A submarine sure as hell can't launch a railgun. Small ships cannot support a railgun. Only a larger surface ship, which means greater detectability and diminished chances of a successful ambush, or land-based installations, again easily detectable, can use railguns. The original post I quoted was on the subject of using railguns to sink carriers, not every tactic and weapons system available to man.
Click to expand...

A submarine detects and marks the target coordinates and relays back to railgun crew.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
Tsumi was making the point that modern navies don't have to get close to the enemy, thus being out of reasonable range to weapons like a railgun. My argument is "You can't always know where your enemy is"
Click to expand...

A railgun would be pretty useless against a sub. Assuming an ambush (traditional close range ambush, not really midway, Midway's damage was inflicted by aircraft attacking at range, not naval guns) a rail gun is going to be either useless or onpar with other existing deck mounted weapons.

Don't get me wrong, I love me some rail gun, its cool as hell, but the practical application to date makes other ordinance just as or more effective.

EDIT: As for a sub sighting for a railgun, yes its possible, but again, a sub can sight for many things. I do not think the presence of a railgun in this situation would change the outcome dramatically.
 
Aireoth said:
A railgun would be pretty useless against a sub. Assuming an ambush (traditional close range ambush, not really midway, Midway's damage was inflicted by aircraft attacking at range, not naval guns) a rail gun is going to be either useless or onpar with other existing deck mounted weapons.

Don't get me wrong, I love me some rail gun, its cool as hell, but the practical application to date makes other ordinance just as or more effective.

EDIT: As for a sub sighting for a railgun, yes its possible, but again, a sub can sight for many things. I do not think the presence of a railgun in this situation would change the outcome dramatically.
Click to expand...
<beats head against wall>
 
sfsuphysics said:
Yeah but imagine the splash! Just youtube a .50 cal rifle firing into a swimming pool and multiply that splash by AWESOME :D
Click to expand...

The splash pressure wave might kill the judges with it's awesome.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
A submarine detects and marks the target coordinates and relays back to railgun crew.
Click to expand...

Which makes a sub more detectable due to EM emissions. A scout plane, triangulating based on emissions from the carriers, or a satellite would be more realistic.

The E-2 Hawkeye used on US carriers is capable of detecting aircraft 550km away, so I assume it should be able to detect ships that far as well. And that is the E-2C designed in 1973 with partial upgrades in the 1990s and first half of 2000, the latest E-2D Hawkeye has a vastly improved radar of which I am unable to find specifics of, along with more powerful computers, etc. Designed to operate more than 300 km away, a potential railgun ship would have to fire from more than 800 km out to not be detected. Testing has only proven 150 km so far, and even if it can go the distance, at current speeds that would be a 6 minute flight time, more than enough time to dodge.
 
Tsumi said:
Which makes a sub more detectable due to EM emissions. A scout plane, triangulating based on emissions from the carriers, or a satellite would be more realistic.

The E-2 Hawkeye used on US carriers is capable of detecting aircraft 550km away, so I assume it should be able to detect ships that far as well. And that is the E-2C designed in 1973 with partial upgrades in the 1990s and first half of 2000, the latest E-2D Hawkeye has a vastly improved radar of which I am unable to find specifics of, along with more powerful computers, etc. Designed to operate more than 300 km away, a potential railgun ship would have to fire from more than 800 km out to not be detected. Testing has only proven 150 km so far, and even if it can go the distance, at current speeds that would be a 6 minute flight time, more than enough time to dodge.
Click to expand...

Not just dodge, even calm seas cause a boat to rock, derp.

So for ship to ship engagements from undetected distances your looking at shooting a rail gun round at a theoretical 800km, with a flight time of 6 minutes, while compensating for ocean movement of the firing vessel, movement of the target ship over the flight time, trajectory for the 800km, and hitting a target 1000ft long (Nimitz Carrier size). That is still one hell of a shot.

Edited with Tsumi's update
 
Last edited:
Aireoth said:
Not just dodge, even calm seas cause a boat to rock, plus you need to account for where the ship will be in 6 minutes, and in all likely hood at 150km range the other ships are aware that your there, maybe even aware that you've fired.

So for ship to ship engagements from undetected distances your looking at shooting a rail gun round at a theoretical 800km, with a flight time of 32 minutes, while compensating for ocean movement of the firing vessel, movement of the target ship over the flight time, trajectory for the 800km, and hitting a target 1000ft long (Nimitz Carrier size). That is one hell of a shot.
Click to expand...

6 minute flight time is based on 800 km distance, fyi ;)
 
Aireoth said:
Not just dodge, even calm seas cause a boat to rock, derp.

So for ship to ship engagements from undetected distances your looking at shooting a rail gun round at a theoretical 800km, with a flight time of 6 minutes, while compensating for ocean movement of the firing vessel, movement of the target ship over the flight time, trajectory for the 800km, and hitting a target 1000ft long (Nimitz Carrier size). That is still one hell of a shot.

Edited with Tsumi's update
Click to expand...


Again, that's why you use a guided projectile. as long as you can keep your CEP in the area the seeker in the guidance system can acquire it's target you are good.

if our theoretical railgun can fire 10 times a minute, you can fire rounds at different elevations and power levels, so that those 10 rounds will impact the target area at the same time, in a Multiple Round Simultaneous Impact (MRSI) firing that will make life difficult for the defenses. It's a technique the Crusader Self propelled gun system was going to use, and the new German PZH2000 self propelled gun uses.
 
motomonkey said:
10 minute of angle (MOA) at 100 miles equals a CEP of roughly 5 kilometers. 1 MOA is roughly equal to 1 inch at 100 yards, 10 MOA is 10 inches at 100 yards. this is why you need guided projectiles.
Click to expand...

So my article I was reading was really old. 2010. Apparently now it is on par accuracy wise to their traditional guns only with a much further range.
 
So what, I watched a documentary a few years ago which showed that the USA has naval railguns. It was fired at the great pyramids to save the world
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top