I don't think guidance would be an issue, but the shell needs to be large enough to host both the guidance and the explosives. Another design would be to take out the explosive entirely and rely only on velocity to cause damage (armor-piecing rigid rounds).
PRC/PLAN Laser and Rail Gun Development Thread
- Thread starter SinoSoldier
- Start date
lcloo
Captain
You mean the electronic guidance can stand up to 50,000G force, and the shell won'r warp in shape and explode from the extreme heat from friction with launch rail?
Excalibur rounds reach a peak acceleration of 18,000Gs, but only for a small fraction of their time in the barrel. The acceleration drops to 2,000G at muzzle exit.
If the EM gun can keep a constant acceleration, then the peak Gs need not be as high as 50,000 G.
I really don't think railgun on ships is viable. But land based railguns/coilgun in Fujian make sense. They can be much larger, so acceleration wouldn't be as much of an issue, they are connected to the grid, so power won't be an issue, repair and maintenance wouldn't be as much as an issue as they would be on a ship. They are mainly are to be used for bombardment of targets in Taiwan, they would have the range to do so. They can also help to provide anti-ship and anti-aircraft fire support for ships in the Taiwan strait if it ever came to that.
Hell, with a long enough barrel, hundred meter+, you could get it to launch anti-ship missiles/drones/sensors for a range boost. Maybe even use it to get cheap ramjet drones/missiles into the air.
For a hundred meter gun barrel, to reach mach 3 would need a constant acceleration of 510 gees. Might be ok for most anti-ship missiles.
The question is, is it worth it compared to just using the money to buy a few dozen more conventional anti-ship missiles or fighter jets?
Hell, with a long enough barrel, hundred meter+, you could get it to launch anti-ship missiles/drones/sensors for a range boost. Maybe even use it to get cheap ramjet drones/missiles into the air.
For a hundred meter gun barrel, to reach mach 3 would need a constant acceleration of 510 gees. Might be ok for most anti-ship missiles.
The question is, is it worth it compared to just using the money to buy a few dozen more conventional anti-ship missiles or fighter jets?
You can’t beat gun based solution in sheer volume of fire, assuming that the barrel doesn’t wear out.
Well for railguns, you got to also consider heat and the charging time of the capacitors, they won't be firing nearly as fast as a conventional gun that's for sure. But the main issue is cost. Billions probably. Is it worth it when that can buy dozens of anti-ship missiles or a handful of fighters or frigates?
But yeah, if China really wants railgun, it make sense for them to build them on land.
Materials that wont warp at 50,000G already exists. It is not "that" high. There are scientific (biology) centrifuges out there reaching over 1M g. Yes that is right 1M.
Rail gun should go two directions. The strategic adoption allows to delivery large cheap war head to a long distance, such as 2000KM. The tactical adoption to speed up small projectile for CIWS that compensate laser based system that will not be able to function in bed weather condition.