PRC/PLAN Laser and Rail Gun Development Thread
- Thread starter SinoSoldier
- Start date
Psudo-liquid PSL armatures, reducing rail/armature friction, lauching at a muzzle speed of Mach 5.5 without gouging (chipping of the rail) and transition (armature turns to plasma or liquid). This was from China in 2012. It said his latest design can reach muzzle speed Mach 7
Not really! To get to 2000km you'll need a power station which won't be movable and so is a sitting duck for the missiles coming from the opposite direction, India is a poor example as it has ballistic missiles that will reach 2000km so has the 'strategic depth' to retaliate and neutralise as even one with a poor CEP, a power station is a pretty big fixed target. Hypothetical or not, poor exemplar!
Jura The idiot
General
oh the Chinese might entertain me (by showing what happened to like five-store-building and now a target-barge while hit), but of course they wouldn't
the energy of a railgun's shot is a fraction of what large-bore guns delivered Yesterday at 8:32 PM; its projectile mass negligible
so it'll be interesting to see what happens during several miliseconds inside the target, what was worth the effort
period
China is working on a mobile containerized nuclear reactor and is expected to produce a prototype by 2022. I expect the reactor to have power in the area of 5-10 MW. That would enable a 400 MJ EM gun at 30% efficiency to fire once every 2-5 minutes. If equipped with 2 mobile reactors, the time would go down to 1-2 minutes per shot. It's a decent rate for such a long range weapon. The containers would most likely be placed on truck platforms, even if in operation its detached, I would expect it to be movable in short notice.
400 MJ / 0.3 = 1333 MJ
1333 MJ / 5 MW = 266 s
400 MJ / 0.3 = 1333 MJ
1333 MJ / 10 MW = 133 s
Well I guess the original author wasn't joking when he said Paris Gun at that rate of fire it would be comparable to the Paris gun, probably looking at half a dozen shots per hour (fire a barrage, dismantle the set up, move, reassemble the setup, fire next barrage) if they get lucky and hit you, radioactive mess in your own territory, besides the terror aspect hardly a realistic 2000 km bombardment weapon, by the time you factor in the cost of the mini reactor is it any cheaper or better than the hundreds of mobile SRBM, MRBMs china already has? You'd be better off putting the whole contraption on a ship and sailing it to where you need to use it than messing around playing lego on the Tibetan plateau.
It is merely a thought experiment, operating and moving such a big platform on the Tibetan Plateau would be difficult in reality (but possible). Cost wise it might not be better but might prove to be harder to intercept compared to a ballistic missile, maybe even seemingly less threatening thus lower level of retaliation. The fixed costs are high but if there is high utilisation the lower variable costs might make it reasonable.
China has extensive experience in tunnel warfare and has built an extensive network of military tunnels. It could utilise the way they move ballistic missiles within in the "underground great wall" to be applied on a railgun system. Have disguised openings and relocate the gun within the network. The mobile reactor can be plugged into a electrical grid within the tunnel network in a deep and secure location. The tunnel electrical grid can then power the rail gun with "outlets" near each opening.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
That is a good question, but have you thought of the possibility that the Chinese were actively concealing the power lines to disguise their railgun tests?
China’s weapons test ranges are vast, and satellite overflight schedules would have been well documented and monitored.
Prep work to bury power lines could have been done during gaps in coverage, or it would have been made to look like regular infrastructure building work, and with Chinese planning, would likely have been done years in advanced.
That particular area would have only gained enough significance for a detailed look once the guns were there. So all the prep work could easily have been missed or dismissed. And from just what is visible, it would not have looked like a railgun test.
If the Chinese had visbible heavy power lines running all over the place during their land based railgun trails, do you not think the US military would have picked up on that and presented it as evidence for more funding for their own railgun tests?
nicky
Junior Member
no need for complicated theories since you can follow development at this small test site fairly regular using a couple of open imagery sources.
in 2013 sean o'connor expressed this opinion in jane's and ever since that time there has been nothing visible to think otherwise.
we can probably add that there's old artillery plant at baotou itself.
yes, prc has a number of real vast test ranges and at least at one of them we can track developments (including earthworks) probably associated with laser weapon or emg., but that's another story.
in 2013 sean o'connor expressed this opinion in jane's and ever since that time there has been nothing visible to think otherwise.
we can probably add that there's old artillery plant at baotou itself.
yes, prc has a number of real vast test ranges and at least at one of them we can track developments (including earthworks) probably associated with laser weapon or emg., but that's another story.