|
#1
●
10-19-2017, 03:51 PM
| ||||||||
 My Rank: CORPORAL Poster Rank:1568 male Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 359 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Quoted: 125 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
United States Navy Railgun Development
 Velocitas Eradico. I, Who Am Speed, Eradicate. Rail guns have long been seen as a "Holy Grail" of naval weapons, as the technology promises hypersonic launch velocities without the use of conventional propellants. Instead of propellants, the output of the ship's power plant may be shunted into a large capacitive device, storing high levels of energy, which are released short bursts as the gun fires. Alternatively, a grouping of compensated pulsed alternators capable of delivering a momentary high spike of energy may be used. The latter approach appears to have the advantages of smaller footprints, inherent graceful degradation should one or more alternators fail, and lower total system weight. The goal, according to Tom Beutner, head of Naval Air Warfare and Weapons for the ONR, is ten shots per minute at 32 megajoules. A 32 megajoule railgun shot is equivalent to about 23,600,000 foot-pounds, so a single 32 MJ shot has the same muzzle energy as about 200,000 .22 rounds being fired simultaneously Note: 1 megajoules as equal to the energy of one tonne moving at 100mph. 33 MJ is equal to 33 tonnes at 100mph. If you were to purchase 33 MJ worth of energy through the public electric grid, it would cost about one dollar. A Tonne (Metricton) = 1,000 Kilograms, 2,205 Pounds. Kinetic energy is given by: K = ½mv2 m is mass (1 or 33 tonnes) v is velocity (100 mph) General Atomics design  32 MJ and 3 MJ GA Blitzer guns ~10 m and ~5 m  Test Fire. The 64 MJ gun is only 10 m long, same as the Zumwalt's AGS. General Atomic's 32 MJ gun is ~9-10 m long. Longer rails have advantages. Additionally 64 MJ barrels weigh only 15 tonnes while Iowa's barrel+breech weighed 120 tonnes. Test fire video of General Atomics weapon and kinetic projectile striking a target.  6 x 2 inch steel plates vs round BAEs design and video of Test Firing  What looks like fire trailing the projectile is actually the air being ignited by the sheer speed and turning into plasma. The round was solid, probably tungsten. When the round was fired it immediately lit into flame because the projectile was accelerated at ~6,000g to reach hypersonic speeds by the time is leaves the barrel. The pressure at the front of the projectile is compressed to an enormous degree, causing the energy in the compressed air to be released as heat. The same thing happens when a spacecraft reenters the Earth's atmosphere. Most spacecraft have an ablative heat shield that burns off during reentry. So the projectile is going through the same process. What it would ultimately look like on-board the USS Zumwalt class and/or Arleigh Burke-class expected to be in service in 2020. On the USS Zumwalt, capacitors/flywheels store electricity that shoot a 20 kg, 155 mm diameter, saboted projectile at ≤60,000 g's through a 10 m long electrified barrel, reaching Mach 7+, curving out of the atmosphere and then back down to land 250 mi away at Mach 5, guided by GPS/INS, releasing a cloud of hypersonic tungsten shrapnel.  Note the relatively small amount of storage occupied by the ammunition, especially compared to the current ammunition for the Zumwalts 155 mm Advanced Gun System. Because of this, a destroyer would be an able to store ~2,000 non-explosive rounds vs the current ~700 explosive rounds for the 5 inch guns  Picture taken from the report to Congress regarding Railgun applications.  Zumwalts could potentially house both a Railgun system and the AGS for maximum effectiveness. No other ship has the size or the necessary power system to do so. Current destroyers can be retrofitted to house one or the other, not both.  Another picture breaking down how it would work on the Zumwalt Destroyers. If there was any doubt the pricy, futuristic Destroyers being able to defend itself, the Railgun will change that and make the ships one of the navy's most lethal.  Beautiful ship altogether. The 600-foot-long warship uses marine turbines similar to those that propel the Boeing 777 to help produce up to 78 megawatts of electricity for use in propulsion, weapons and sensors. That's more than enough power for the railgun which only requires 25 megawatts. Along with its 80 VLS the Zumwalt could potentially be the US Navys powerhouse Really demonstrates the United States Navy superiority in weapon platforms, systems and technology  There was even an army design. Canceled. This picture is all I can find regarding the design. However the Pentagon and Army are now firing the Hyper Velocity Projectile from an Army Howitzer in order to potential harness near-term weapons ability, increase the scope, lethality and range ability to accelerate combat deployment of the lethal, high-speed round. The hypervelocity projectile can fire at high speeds toward enemy targets to include buildings, force concentrations, weapons systems, drones, aircraft,vehicle bunkers and even incoming enemy missiles and artillery rounds.  General Atomics mobile land system. "Blitzer Railgun system". Deep magazine, high rate of fire, and inexpensive to defend against cruise and ballistic missiles. Video demonstration of the Blitzer.  General Atomics land based system for anti missile, ICBM defense. Rounds. The shells can carry different payloads, just like other artillery shells: high explosives, shrapnel, or unitary "solid slugs." (Possibly even EO/IR for battle damage assessment). "Slugs" like APFSDS's are better for destroying tanks; shrapnel is better for hitting small, fast missiles. HVP (Hypervelocity Projectile, by BAE) is the current round. It carries a payload of either HE or shrapnel. It's command-guided; a GPS/INS package will be added later. It can also be fired from normal 5" naval guns (albeit only to Mach 3), so Burkes/Ticos can soon also launch GPS shells  BAEs version of the HVP  Boeings version of the HVP BAE interview to show off their HVP, their sea demo in 2015, IOC in 2018.  Note the round shedding it's "shell" of sorts upon exiting the barrel. All rounds come with protection to protect it and the barrel against barrel degradation that has given the Navy problems the last decade. As of right now they have met the Navys standard of 1000 rounds per lifespan by hitting 3000+ rounds per lifespan. Massive improvement of 400 rounds per lifespan in 2012. The now declassified video above demonstrates BAEs version being able to fire multiple rounds.  Above picture is from a update report to Congress regarding the HVP  Showing off the different variants of the HVP.  Close up picture of 3 of the variants.  $25k to $250k per round, depending on guidance package.
Advantages/Benefits
 Power supply for a railgun during initial testing. A flywheel, a compulsator, and a capacitor bank. UTexas. They also designed the the 500 MJ "flywheels" that power the EMALS. Additional 2010 footage and closeups of the projectiles. Also gives a good look at the older power supply and how much it's been shrunk.   Different weapon models from BAE  HVP compared to LRLAP (Zumwalt)  An early design of the kinetic projectile  Another early design, but for who is unknown. Might've been the army's attempt. The Navy studied to convert Arleigh Burke class DDG 51 Flight I Destroyers to Railgun platforms. It was previously stated the 51s would unable to carry the weapon due to its high demand of power and the ships design never intended to power such a weapon. With recent breakthroughs it seems the Navy and Pentagon have changed their minds. Below is a summary of the report   The Destroyers will lose 30 VLS cells, all 8 harpoon missiles (anti-ship missiles) and its Mark 45 5 inch gun for the Railgun. |
|
#5
●
03-28-2019, 12:55 AM
| ||||||||
 My Rank: LANCE CORPORAL Poster Rank:3174 Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 119 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Quoted: 2 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: United States Navy Railgun Development
They need to use an atomic power generator if anything If that exists.. if it doesnt it needs to get get made, imagine the power of an atomic bomb contained in a cylinder |
