Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

User avatar
Lighthawk
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 4632
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 7:55 pm
Location: Missouri, USA, North America, Earth, Sol System, Orion Arm, Milkyway Galaxy, Local Group, Universe

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Lighthawk »

SolkaTruesilver wrote:If you keep up coming with that kind of weaponry, I don't see why anyonre would think they'd stand a chance against you in a fair fight.
Exactly.
the more you develop these Superweapon, the more you make them useless. Quite the paradox, actually.
Useless my ass. Even if they never get used (which I doubt, someone somewhere at sometime will be brave/foolish/stupid enough to present a target suitable for this and just about anything else we come up with) if the weapon's very existence makes other people too afraid to pick a fight with us, it is money well spent.
Also, people, what do you think would be the effectiveness of such railgun if positionned on a Satellite, to do Sat Vs Sat warfare? Could you project a railgun projectile into Extreme Fast Orbit to strike down a satellite on the other side of the globe? (or it's a shot even Luke coudn't suceed?)
Total waste of money. It'd be a big, heavy (remember the rounds get their oomp from our friend mass X acceleration, so they need to have some heft to them, and every pound lugged into orbit is pricey) one shot deal. The recoil would knock the sat out of it'd orbit. If you have a sat with the right stuff to store and release as much energy as a railgun, put a big laser on it. Much more practical.
Image
SolkaTruesilver
Commander
Commander
Posts: 1406
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:49 am

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by SolkaTruesilver »

Lighthawk wrote:
the more you develop these Superweapon, the more you make them useless. Quite the paradox, actually.
Useless my ass. Even if they never get used (which I doubt, someone somewhere at sometime will be brave/foolish/stupid enough to present a target suitable for this and just about anything else we come up with) if the weapon's very existence makes other people too afraid to pick a fight with us, it is money well spent.
It doesn't make people too afraid to pick a fight with you, it make people too afraid to attack you military, so they decide to attack your citizens abroad or at home instead. It makes the ennemy resort to guerilla tactic and terrorism.

And then you have the gall of calling them "gutless" for using said tactic, when they simply have no other alternatives.

(disclamer: This is by no mean a judgement on wether or no they are fighting for the right reason, motivation, or at the right target. This is only a judgement call on the methods used in an armed conflict, and the public's reaction to said methods)
Also, people, what do you think would be the effectiveness of such railgun if positionned on a Satellite, to do Sat Vs Sat warfare? Could you project a railgun projectile into Extreme Fast Orbit to strike down a satellite on the other side of the globe? (or it's a shot even Luke coudn't suceed?)
Total waste of money. It'd be a big, heavy (remember the rounds get their oomp from our friend mass X acceleration, so they need to have some heft to them, and every pound lugged into orbit is pricey) one shot deal. The recoil would knock the sat out of it'd orbit. If you have a sat with the right stuff to store and release as much energy as a railgun, put a big laser on it. Much more practical.[/quote]

Well, I wasn't thinking of whole rails but maybe pen-sized hyperaccelerated projectiles, fast ennough to take down a sat?

Thing is, you need a LoS for the laser to work. It's a good wepaon, but it lacks a subtle reach that the orbital projectile offers.
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Mikey »

Lighthawk wrote:Useless my ass. Even if they never get used (which I doubt, someone somewhere at sometime will be brave/foolish/stupid enough to present a target suitable for this and just about anything else we come up with) if the weapon's very existence makes other people too afraid to pick a fight with us, it is money well spent.
Thank you, LH. OK, so one other person has heard of deterrence. We've never launched nukes, either, but the fact of having them (read: "MAD") has been a pretty big factor in the fact that nobody else has launched them.
SolkaTruesilver wrote:It doesn't make people too afraid to pick a fight with you, it make people too afraid to attack you military, so they decide to attack your citizens abroad or at home instead. It makes the ennemy resort to guerilla tactic and terrorism.

And then you have the gall of calling them "gutless" for using said tactic, when they simply have no other alternatives.
Dude, really? Who exactly would respond to attacks on U.S. citizenry, if not out military? Do you think there's a potential terrorist out there somewhere thinking, "The U.S. military is too strong for us... but if we attack civilian population centers, then we will only have to deal with a response from the Girl Scouts!"
SolkaTruesilver wrote:Well, I wasn't thinking of whole rails but maybe pen-sized hyperaccelerated projectiles, fast ennough to take down a sat?

Thing is, you need a LoS for the laser to work. It's a good wepaon, but it lacks a subtle reach that the orbital projectile offers.
Personally, I think for sat-based weaponry we need to return to the thinking of the 1950's and look at neutral-particle beam weapons (H atom beams, most likely.)
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
SolkaTruesilver
Commander
Commander
Posts: 1406
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:49 am

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by SolkaTruesilver »

Mikey wrote:Dude, really? Who exactly would respond to attacks on U.S. citizenry, if not out military? Do you think there's a potential terrorist out there somewhere thinking, "The U.S. military is too strong for us... but if we attack civilian population centers, then we will only have to deal with a response from the Girl Scouts!"
But then, they would be hiding among a civilian population, which makes the whole Uberweaponry useless to begin with. They force your armed force to become a civilian-monitoring service that has to strike with the least collateral damage possible.

Which is still better than to face the full wrath of the US military. There is simply no one that would actually consider attacking one of your military base the "conventional" way. So the other targets possible are guerilla strike or terrorism at your population.
Mikey wrote:
SolkaTruesilver wrote:Well, I wasn't thinking of whole rails but maybe pen-sized hyperaccelerated projectiles, fast ennough to take down a sat?

Thing is, you need a LoS for the laser to work. It's a good wepaon, but it lacks a subtle reach that the orbital projectile offers.
Personally, I think for sat-based weaponry we need to return to the thinking of the 1950's and look at neutral-particle beam weapons (H atom beams, most likely.)
Wait. Is this real, or you are just making fun of the whole discussion?
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Mikey »

SolkaTruesilver wrote:But then, they would be hiding among a civilian population, which makes the whole Uberweaponry useless to begin with. They force your armed force to become a civilian-monitoring service that has to strike with the least collateral damage possible.
Which makes something like this rail gun even more useful. GPS-guided, 100+ mile, non-explosve munitions... perfect for that sort of thing.

Unless you're saying that terrorism makes deterrence useless, which is a different case and not one which I have the masochistic streak to debate.
SolkaTruesilver wrote:Wait. Is this real, or you are just making fun of the whole discussion?
Of course it's real. Not likely very soon, because of the size of the accelerators needed to get particles up to a few million eV en masse, but the idea has been under real discussion for some thirty years:
Dr. Richard Roberds on the matter.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
SolkaTruesilver
Commander
Commander
Posts: 1406
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:49 am

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by SolkaTruesilver »

Mikey wrote:
SolkaTruesilver wrote:But then, they would be hiding among a civilian population, which makes the whole Uberweaponry useless to begin with. They force your armed force to become a civilian-monitoring service that has to strike with the least collateral damage possible.
Which makes something like this rail gun even more useful. GPS-guided, 100+ mile, non-explosve munitions... perfect for that sort of thing.

Unless you're saying that terrorism makes deterrence useless, which is a different case and not one which I have the masochistic streak to debate.
How big a crater a rail run leaves? Would it blow up a house?

I think there is such thing as overpowerful military. I know it may sucks for them, but if I have the choice between 10 soldiers down or 10 civilians down, I'd rather have the injured soldiers. If we could find a way to offer targets of opportunity for our ennemies so they feel it's a good idea to strike THERE rather than your population center, than you just genuinely improved the protection for your civilians, which is exactly what an armed force is supposed to do.

If you offer an indestructable front, military-wise, there is simply nothing else to attack than to go for the cheap shot. It's like having a man walking in armored plate everywhere except the groin, and saying that "groin hits are unfair". You gotta leave something else exposed if you really want people to respect your "groin hits are unfair".

I know it's not "that" simple. But the basic principle is still there and still applies. You will face genuine terrorism threaths to your population as long as there is no other choice for your ennemies than to use those means and to strike at those targets. Increasing the conventional might of your military ain't gonna resolve the problem.
Mikey wrote: Of course it's real. Not likely very soon, because of the size of the accelerators needed to get particles up to a few million eV en masse, but the idea has been under real discussion for some thirty years:
Dr. Richard Roberds on the matter.
Neat. The problem is, how much development happened in the past 10 years toward a functionnable weapon of the like? The theory is always funny, but we only have recently been able to master Attack Drones, genuinely powerful beam weaponry, power armor and railguns. Are Neutron beams a thing for the next 10 years, or more like the next 40 years?
Tsukiyumi
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 21747
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:38 pm
Location: Forward Torpedo Tube Twenty. Help!
Contact:

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Tsukiyumi »

SolkaTruesilver wrote:I know it's not "that" simple. But the basic principle is still there and still applies. You will face genuine terrorism threaths to your population as long as there is no other choice for your ennemies than to use those means and to strike at those targets. Increasing the conventional might of your military ain't gonna resolve the problem.
"No other choice"? How about not attacking us at all? Having a powerful conventional military allows us to strike back when we're attacked. Your suggestion is what? Have a weaker military, so that when our troops are attacked, we aren't able to strike back as effectively?

Wow.

The railgun would allow us to use intel to attack targets without putting as many boots on the ground, and minimize civilian casualties.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Mikey »

SolkaTruesilver wrote:How big a crater a rail run leaves? Would it blow up a house?

I think there is such thing as overpowerful military. I know it may sucks for them, but if I have the choice between 10 soldiers down or 10 civilians down, I'd rather have the injured soldiers. If we could find a way to offer targets of opportunity for our ennemies so they feel it's a good idea to strike THERE rather than your population center, than you just genuinely improved the protection for your civilians, which is exactly what an armed force is supposed to do.

If you offer an indestructable front, military-wise, there is simply nothing else to attack than to go for the cheap shot. It's like having a man walking in armored plate everywhere except the groin, and saying that "groin hits are unfair". You gotta leave something else exposed if you really want people to respect your "groin hits are unfair".

I know it's not "that" simple. But the basic principle is still there and still applies. You will face genuine terrorism threaths to your population as long as there is no other choice for your ennemies than to use those means and to strike at those targets. Increasing the conventional might of your military ain't gonna resolve the problem.
It's this kind of thinking that leads people to blame rape victims for wearing miniskirts. Your logic is, in essence, that terrorism perpetrated against the U.S. is our fault for having a strong military. Well... bullshit. Terrorism is NOT alternative methodology to what would otherwise be conventional military attacks. What you are describing is some farcical situation in which a military confrontation exists between would-be terrorists and the U.S., and our antagonists decide to use terrorism because they can't win in a stand-up fight. That's just not the case, in any way, shape, or form. Terrorism will always target civilians, and always has, because it is by definition not a miltary act - it is a means of political statement.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Mikey »

SolkaTruesilver wrote:Neat. The problem is, how much development happened in the past 10 years toward a functionnable weapon of the like? The theory is always funny, but we only have recently been able to master Attack Drones, genuinely powerful beam weaponry, power armor and railguns. Are Neutron beams a thing for the next 10 years, or more like the next 40 years?
#1 - I, nor the article I linked, ever said anything about neutron weaponry. We've already got that.

#2 - I know it's not practicable. If you'd read more than just a bot of each post, you'd see I even said initially that it wasn't even likely anytime soon. I posted it as a statement - which you can actually read if you'd like - of what my preference for a direction for satellite weaponry research would be.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
Lighthawk
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 4632
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 7:55 pm
Location: Missouri, USA, North America, Earth, Sol System, Orion Arm, Milkyway Galaxy, Local Group, Universe

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Lighthawk »

A bit of expansion on Mikey's point.

You don't want to give an enemy ANY potential means to attack you, at all, ever. The US has developed it's military to the point that no other conventional army could hope to strike at the US and make a successful invasion. We are as close to immune to the threat of another power taking over our land as it is possible for us to be. This is a GOOD thing. Terrorist attacks, while terrible, pale utterly in comparison in every possible way to having a hostile power occupying your land and being able to do whatever the hell they please with your citizens. Most obvious example, WWII and all the land Germany took over.

Forcing your enemies to resort to guerrilla combat* is a good thing over all. If that is all they can do, the ability of them to win in any form is highly unlikely. Guerrilla forces are a right pain in the ass yes, but their ability to cause damage just doesn't compare to the clash of two equal military forces, and very few guerrilla forces have ever won their cause.

*Also note that guerrilla tactics and terrorism are not synonyms. They have similarities, but one is not the other. Terrorists purposefully target civilians, that's what makes them terrorists, they spread terror and try to cause change through fear in the population. Many guerrilla forces have resorted to terrorism, but others have restrained themselves to purely military targets.

In closing, the US having an uber army might, might mind you, mean the only option our enemies have is terrorism, but that doesn't mean we should weaken our military so that we are vulnerable to conventional war, it means we need to make our anti-terrorism forces that much better. And having our uber army comes in handy when we catch said terrorists in a spot where we can hammer them with our overpowered weapons without them being able to fight back.
Image
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Captain Seafort »

Lighthawk wrote:You don't want to give an enemy ANY potential means to attack you, at all, ever. The US has developed it's military to the point that no other conventional army could hope to strike at the US and make a successful invasion. We are as close to immune to the threat of another power taking over our land as it is possible for us to be. This is a GOOD thing.
True, but that was true a century ago - the effective immunity of the US from invasion is as much a function of geography (both in terms of the isolation of the American continent and the fact that virtually the entire US coastline could have been purposely designed to defeat an amphibious assault) as your military.
Many guerrilla forces have resorted to terrorism, but others have restrained themselves to purely military targets.
Be careful of your definitions. "Terrorism" and "attacks only military targets" are not antonyms. A bomb planted under a general's car is just as much terrorism as one planted under a random civilian car.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Captain Seafort »

SolkaTruesilver wrote:If you keep up coming with that kind of weaponry, I don't see why anyonre would think they'd stand a chance against you in a fair fight.
Easy - they build their own railguns. Alternatively, they build their own railguns first, maybe slightly later than they would have otherwise but still before you, and then you're the ones have to play catch-up.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
SolkaTruesilver
Commander
Commander
Posts: 1406
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:49 am

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by SolkaTruesilver »

Captain Seafort wrote:
SolkaTruesilver wrote:If you keep up coming with that kind of weaponry, I don't see why anyonre would think they'd stand a chance against you in a fair fight.
Easy - they build their own railguns. Alternatively, they build their own railguns first, maybe slightly later than they would have otherwise but still before you, and then you're the ones have to play catch-up.
I guess there is always the possibility that another power outtech the US, but I have a hard time seeing it happen within the next 20 years
Tyyr
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
Posts: 10654
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:49 pm
Location: Jeri Ryan's Dressing Room, Shhhhh

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Tyyr »

China and Russia are still pushing. All it takes is for the US to stop what it's doing for five or ten years and our edge will go away. Research stalls, the brilliant minds working on these things find someone else to do, all our tech and ideas sits on the shelf gathering dust for years and then has to be re-engineered. The only way to stay on top is to constantly push yourself to make it happen.
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: Navy Tests Electromagnetic Railgun

Post by Teaos »

The idea of it being a deterant is pointless, you have nukes, end of story. Any other super weapon as a deterant is just getting someone rich somewhere. I'm all for R&D but at a moderated pace.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
Post Reply