055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[AndrewS]

One way to potentially boost range while also achieving terminal precision guidance without sacrificing speed could be to make the shells into mini-scramjets with TVC for course correction.

Such scramjet shells will probably not have much room for warheads, so will need to rely on KE to so most of the damage, so would probably be more suitable for AA or anti-shipping rather than shore bombardment fire support.

Or maybe just accept that a railgun projectile won't be that accurate, and supply it with a dispenser for tungsten ball bearings?

We've seen that video where a hypersonic ASBM dispenses ball bearings. Then it also becomes an area cluster munition suitable for soft targets.

Technologically, that is a lot simpler and cheaper. And they should already have a larger version which is already perfected from the ASBM warhead.

 

[ougoah]

Why are you trying to hinge the entire existence or use of the railgun on it being able to target a single moving target at the very extreme edge of it's firing range.
The whole idea of the railgun is to present a significant upgrade from the traditional propellant based gun system. Modern gun systems perform a variety of functions including air defence, surface interdiction and shore bombardment. Faster projectile speed and longer range of engagements helps in all 3 of these duties. Hitting a moving target 200 miles away would be the least of the railgun's concerns.
Nowhere is it stated that guided projectiles would be slower than unguided projectiles and however expensive they will be compared to tradition shells they will certainly be alot of a heck cheaper than a million dollar cruise missile, missiles which are even slower and subjected to all the kind of jamming and electronic warfare that you highlighted for the railgun projectiles. Removing the need to store propellant onboard the ships gives it additional storage space, as well as removing a potential hazard of propellant detonation.
I am starting to see a pattern here, it would seem to you that whenever a weapons system fails to perform a singular task set out to by you perfectly. It is automatically deemed to be purposeless and useless. Nevermind the fact that it has a myriad of other uses that you left out.

Yes agreed that railguns are certainly an upgrade and worthy of development because future models will be better than the one in existence. Air defence, surface interdiction, and shore bombardment can be done with many different things, some cheaper than a railgun and more space efficient. All I'm suggesting originally is the idea of using this railgun as some sort of supplement for medium or long range missiles is simply not realistic unless they have amazingly effective guided rounds. Agreed with bold part. It is the least of the railgun's concerns simply because it isn't capable of realistically achieving this just now. Guided rounds may or may not be slower or more expensive or space saving, but we know they do not replace cruise missiles that can swing around a target and engage from different directions, not to mention far greater ranges.

Nowhere did I say a railgun is purposeless or useless. The keyword there is "potentially" so please check the context and apply some thinking. Essentially I said there is a potential for at least the first generation of railguns to remain testing and evaluation subjects rather than applicable in the event that they are proven to be less effective than imagined. That all depends on guided rounds, their costs, and the space and power necessary to put a railgun on something like a Type 055. So please don't put words in my mouth. That is some distance away from simply stating they are 100% useless. I'm just weighing in on ridiculous notions pamphlets have mentioned of using railgun to engage targets 200km away and then carrying on from there. Then again maybe you are just incapable of finding nuance and lack the ability to think further than the immediate conclusion from glancing through a passage and picking up keywords.

 

[plawolf]

Or maybe just accept that a railgun projectile won't be that accurate, and supply it with a dispenser for tungsten ball bearings?

We've seen that video where a hypersonic ASBM dispenses ball bearings. Then it also becomes an area cluster munition suitable for soft targets.

Technologically, that is a lot simpler and cheaper. And they should already have a larger version which is already perfected from the ASBM warhead.

Do you have a link to the video?

 

[Jura The idiot]

Didn't see that before.

thought you'd ignored
#6083 Jura, Sep 2, 2018

There's countless sources for a $25K for a railgun round.

inside the link you've now provided (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

), dated April 7, 2014,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(likely retired by now), is quoted to say

"This costs right here about $25,000,"

and further down in the article they say "The first rail gun

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

..." (it didn't in 2016 indeed)

so considering the status as of Aug 30, 2018

May 8, 2018
now the latest is inside of
Navy Making Room for Railguns in Next Warship, But No Extra Investments

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

I'm wondering if the cost is on the path to like a million for an AGS round Nov 7, 2016

Dec 23, 2014
and now New Warship’s Big Guns Have No Bullets

source is DefenseNews

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

NB. You seriously need to get over your pointless LOL comments every time I write something. It just sounds like sour grapes in the face of reality.

oh I'm still waiting for Bhutan getting ten billion dollars from China announced by you Aug 24, 2017

China woos Bhutan with $10 billion in standoff with India

Beijing seen driving wedge in New Delhi-Thimphu alliance
YUJI KURONUMA, Nikkei staff writer

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

...

 

[Tam]

Doesn't sound like on topic anymore.

 

[AndrewS]

Do you have a link to the video?

It was posted a while back on SDF.

The thing that struck me was the part with the ASBM warhead which had blowout panels releasing a cloud of projectiles.

 

[AndrewS]

Doesn't sound like on topic anymore.

Yeah. Jura is just salty now. He's trying to contradict the head of US navy research on the cost of a railgun round. It's just a slug of solid metal, so how can the cost spiral upwards like crazy?

On Bhutan, China may have offered 10 billion but can Bhutan ever accept?

India funds and trains the Bhutan police and the Bhutan army. Bhutan is virtually an Indian colony. But it's better than being invaded, like what India did with Sikkim just next door.

Anyway, back on topic now

 

[Deino]

Anyway, back on topic now

Exactly ... therefore a kind reminder to all: STAY on topic ... please.

 

[Orthan]

I dont know if this has already been refered in this forum. Acording to this article, china will get naval engine technology from russia, and in exchange, it will fix russian ships.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

What do you think of this?

 

[Deino]

I dont know if this has already been refered in this forum. Acording to this article, china will get naval engine technology from russia, and in exchange, it will fix russian ships.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

What do you think of this?

Pardon !!!! And what has this to do with the Type 055?? ... come on guys, I slowly get the feeling that in several threads, several members more or more DO NOT care about the structure and the topic. They start random discussions on side aspects that usually slowly grow to pages and pages of endless - sometimes back and forth arguments - discussions but all off topic.

Therefore again ... I know you can better.