What's new

Chinese Navy ship seen carrying an apparent railgun capable of firing hypersonic projectiles

beijingwalker

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
65,195
Reaction score
-55
Country
China
Location
China
Chinese Navy ship seen carrying an apparent railgun capable of firing hypersonic projectiles
by Alan Weedon
Updated 10 minutes ago

10680502-3x2-700x467.jpg

A Chinese naval warship has been pictured out at sea carrying what appears to be an electromagnetic railgun.

A photo taken and posted by Weibo user (and prominent defence blogger) Haohan-Red Shark, purports to show the Type 072II Yuting-class tank landing ship Haiyangshan with a railgun mounted on its bow.

Compared to conventional artillery that uses gunpowder to fire projectiles — a practice that has been in wide use since the 1500s — a railgun uses a high-powered electric circuit to shoot a projectile along magnetic rails, firing at hypersonic speeds of Mach 5 or higher (five times the speed of sound).

While the US has been pursuing its railgun capability since 2005, China has seemingly taken the front foot, with anonymous sources confirming the existence of the weapon in 2011 to CNBC.

Since then, Chinese media has been incrementally filing news reports on the development on the technology, with the Global Times reporting in March that Zhang Xiao, an associate research fellow at the People's Liberation Army's (PLA) University of Engineering announced her research team was responsible for the "largest repeating power supply system in the world".

The sighting, which comes as China marks the 70th anniversary of the Chinese Navy in 2019, appears to pre-date US intelligence estimates that Chinese railguns would arrive by 2025.

Railguns to usher in naval 'hemispheric battle space'
Dr Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, told the ABC the technology would usher in a "hemispheric battle space".

"This would see belligerents able to strike at each other at distances ranging in the hundreds of kilometres", Dr Davis said.


This would fundamentally change the nature of engagements as you could have adversaries being able to make precise strikes from afar for much less money."

Compared to conventional naval artillery, the railgun does not fire explosives in the round, making warships a touch safer for those onboard, and naval artillery cheaper to acquire for militaries.

"If you think back to the World War II battle between the German battleship Bismarck and HMS Hood, the latter sunk within minutes because the Germans struck near ammunition magazines," he said.

The development of the technology from various powers has been slow, given the incredibly large currents required to power railguns — about one million amps — and the practical implications this has on barrel design.

Previous US railgun tests saw barrels melt during firing, and current research has revolved around cooling the rails to maintain high energy per shot.

'Americans aren't going slow'
In the years since 2011, Chinese researchers have been testing the weapon at greater distances.

A US intelligence report found that China's weapon would be able to strike 200 kilometres away with a projectile velocity of 2.5 kilometres per second (9,000kph — greater than Mach 7).

While US developments remain classified, the US Office of Naval Research (ONR) gave BAE systems $48.3 million to test phase 2 of their railgun program in 2013.

This phase will usher in the development of a multiple-shot railgun, alongside the development of a Hyper Velocity Projectile (HVP) that would see missiles fire at hypersonic speeds — technology that Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed Russia had successfully tested in December.

Speaking to website Task & Purpose, the US Strategic Capabilities Office's (SCO) spokesperson Chris Sherwood said that the railgun was not high on the agenda.

"SCO shifted the project's focus to conventional powder guns, facilitating a faster transition of HVP technology to the warfighter," he said.

"Our priority continues to be the HVP, which is reflected in the program's budget."

The US thus far has spent around $710.5 million on the railgun program, but experts fear it will languish as research weight pulls toward HVPs.

"The Americans certainly aren't going slow. They've realised they've lagged behind Russia and China and are racing to catch up," Dr Davis said.

"What's happened in the past is that the US has years of research and development, but due to funding cuts, a decade of research goes dead in the water."

Advanced technology part of Xi's 2025 plan
China is no stranger to experiments in electromagnetic technology, having created one of the world's first highways lined with solar-powered material to re-charge vehicles in transit.

This forms part of a broader Beijing strategy to move China away from being just a producer of everyday goods into one of advanced manufacturing, with about $US300 billion invested in the "Made in China 2025" plan.

The country already produces many of the world's smartphones, and as its economic weight shifts toward domestic consumption, its push to spearheading technological advances follows in the footsteps of previous superpowers such as the US and Britain.

What also comes with being a superpower is the ability to project hard power across the globe, which China has not shied away from.

"The rapid growth of the PLA Navy could easily take over the US Navy in the Asia-Pacific, if not comparable, by the 2030s," Dr Davis said.

"So the 2020s presents a real risk of a US-China military clash, seeing as Xi Jinping has said he will not tolerate Taiwanese independence, and they're not willing to let go of the South China Sea — which is fundamentally at odds with what the US wants."

The Chinese foreign ministry and the Chinese Consulate have been contacted for comment.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01...ctromagnetic-railguns-spotted-at-sea/10680108
 
. . .
Chinese Navy ship seen carrying an apparent railgun capable of firing hypersonic projectiles
by Alan Weedon
Updated 10 minutes ago

10680502-3x2-700x467.jpg

A Chinese naval warship has been pictured out at sea carrying what appears to be an electromagnetic railgun.

A photo taken and posted by Weibo user (and prominent defence blogger) Haohan-Red Shark, purports to show the Type 072II Yuting-class tank landing ship Haiyangshan with a railgun mounted on its bow.

Compared to conventional artillery that uses gunpowder to fire projectiles — a practice that has been in wide use since the 1500s — a railgun uses a high-powered electric circuit to shoot a projectile along magnetic rails, firing at hypersonic speeds of Mach 5 or higher (five times the speed of sound).

While the US has been pursuing its railgun capability since 2005, China has seemingly taken the front foot, with anonymous sources confirming the existence of the weapon in 2011 to CNBC.

Since then, Chinese media has been incrementally filing news reports on the development on the technology, with the Global Times reporting in March that Zhang Xiao, an associate research fellow at the People's Liberation Army's (PLA) University of Engineering announced her research team was responsible for the "largest repeating power supply system in the world".

The sighting, which comes as China marks the 70th anniversary of the Chinese Navy in 2019, appears to pre-date US intelligence estimates that Chinese railguns would arrive by 2025.

Railguns to usher in naval 'hemispheric battle space'
Dr Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, told the ABC the technology would usher in a "hemispheric battle space".

"This would see belligerents able to strike at each other at distances ranging in the hundreds of kilometres", Dr Davis said.


This would fundamentally change the nature of engagements as you could have adversaries being able to make precise strikes from afar for much less money."

Compared to conventional naval artillery, the railgun does not fire explosives in the round, making warships a touch safer for those onboard, and naval artillery cheaper to acquire for militaries.

"If you think back to the World War II battle between the German battleship Bismarck and HMS Hood, the latter sunk within minutes because the Germans struck near ammunition magazines," he said.

The development of the technology from various powers has been slow, given the incredibly large currents required to power railguns — about one million amps — and the practical implications this has on barrel design.

Previous US railgun tests saw barrels melt during firing, and current research has revolved around cooling the rails to maintain high energy per shot.

'Americans aren't going slow'
In the years since 2011, Chinese researchers have been testing the weapon at greater distances.

A US intelligence report found that China's weapon would be able to strike 200 kilometres away with a projectile velocity of 2.5 kilometres per second (9,000kph — greater than Mach 7).

While US developments remain classified, the US Office of Naval Research (ONR) gave BAE systems $48.3 million to test phase 2 of their railgun program in 2013.

This phase will usher in the development of a multiple-shot railgun, alongside the development of a Hyper Velocity Projectile (HVP) that would see missiles fire at hypersonic speeds — technology that Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed Russia had successfully tested in December.

Speaking to website Task & Purpose, the US Strategic Capabilities Office's (SCO) spokesperson Chris Sherwood said that the railgun was not high on the agenda.

"SCO shifted the project's focus to conventional powder guns, facilitating a faster transition of HVP technology to the warfighter," he said.

"Our priority continues to be the HVP, which is reflected in the program's budget."

The US thus far has spent around $710.5 million on the railgun program, but experts fear it will languish as research weight pulls toward HVPs.

"The Americans certainly aren't going slow. They've realised they've lagged behind Russia and China and are racing to catch up," Dr Davis said.

"What's happened in the past is that the US has years of research and development, but due to funding cuts, a decade of research goes dead in the water."

Advanced technology part of Xi's 2025 plan
China is no stranger to experiments in electromagnetic technology, having created one of the world's first highways lined with solar-powered material to re-charge vehicles in transit.

This forms part of a broader Beijing strategy to move China away from being just a producer of everyday goods into one of advanced manufacturing, with about $US300 billion invested in the "Made in China 2025" plan.

The country already produces many of the world's smartphones, and as its economic weight shifts toward domestic consumption, its push to spearheading technological advances follows in the footsteps of previous superpowers such as the US and Britain.

What also comes with being a superpower is the ability to project hard power across the globe, which China has not shied away from.

"The rapid growth of the PLA Navy could easily take over the US Navy in the Asia-Pacific, if not comparable, by the 2030s," Dr Davis said.

"So the 2020s presents a real risk of a US-China military clash, seeing as Xi Jinping has said he will not tolerate Taiwanese independence, and they're not willing to let go of the South China Sea — which is fundamentally at odds with what the US wants."

The Chinese foreign ministry and the Chinese Consulate have been contacted for comment.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01...ctromagnetic-railguns-spotted-at-sea/10680108


that gun looks huge
 
. . . .
Type 055 cannot carry railgun unless either the electricity output on a type 055 has changed, or the railgun design has changed.

Most ship designed in the past decade are not designed to carry railgun in mind, their core electricity power output is not much, 055 is estimated to have around 30 to 40 MW output, not enough for an acceptable railgun range to do any damage. The 5 inch railgun the US has tested have a total input of 60KW. Which mean either 055 double their electricity output by adding generator (Which would mean a complete redesign of naval architecture like they do with the landing ship) or the Chinese scientist can somehow put a more effective and efficient railgun design on their ship.

The only non-nuclear powered ship that build around the railgun concept currently in service is the Zumwalt Class Destroyer, which have 4 turbine and generator gave a combine 78MW output.
 
.
Type 055 cannot carry railgun unless either the electricity output on a type 055 has changed, or the railgun design has changed.

Most ship designed in the past decade are not designed to carry railgun in mind, their core electricity power output is not much, 055 is estimated to have around 30 to 40 MW output, not enough for an acceptable railgun range to do any damage. The 5 inch railgun the US has tested have a total input of 60KW. Which mean either 055 double their electricity output by adding generator (Which would mean a complete redesign of naval architecture like they do with the landing ship) or the Chinese scientist can somehow put a more effective and efficient railgun design on their ship.

The only non-nuclear powered ship that build around the railgun concept currently in service is the Zumwalt Class Destroyer, which have 4 turbine and generator gave a combine 78MW output.
I think it’s not MW that matters.

To fire a projectile out of a pair of rails a high electro magnetic field is needed. The higher the EMF, the faster the projectile. The EF is proportional to electric current. So the more the electric current, the higher the EMF. To fire some millions amps is necessary. 15 million amps is a good stuff. However to get such high current, capacitors are needed. So we have something like these to build a railgun: fuels, a high performance power generator, large capacitor banks, rails made by extremely thermal resistant metal and last but not least a metal projectile.

In short, warship with railgun is a dead end. Shore based railgun is more realistic.
 
.
I think it’s not MW that matters.

To fire a projectile out of a pair of rails a high electro magnetic field is needed. The higher the EMF, the faster the projectile. The EF is proportional to electric current. So the more the electric current, the higher the EMF. To fire some millions amps is necessary. 15 million amps is a good stuff. However to get such high current, capacitors are needed. So we have something like these to build a railgun: fuels, a high performance power generator, large capacitor banks, rails made by extremely thermal resistant metal and last but not least a metal projectile.

In short, warship with railgun is a dead end. Shore based railgun is more realistic.

Well, to be precise, you will need 6 millions amp to shoot a 32MJ round at mach 7, to have that amount, you will need to have a generator that can generate a magnetic field strength of 10 tesla or above. Which would be about 1/4 of what it need for a EMALS launcher (which shoot about 120 MJ).

Can anyone do it? Well, yes this can be done, or else we wouldn't have Gerald Ford, theatrically, but if you have a 10 tesla magnetic field generator on board a close ship, you probably kill everyone in it with the EM wave. Which mean the structure have to be adapted to protect/shield personnel and equipment from the strong EM field.

On the other hand, while the ampere problem can be managed, you cannot shoot the gun if you do not have enough power, and since you cannot translate electricity power to kinetic energy without any loss, which mean even with Zumwalt, you probably cannot max out the power from the railgun anyway. Which is the reason why even tho we have a functioning 32MJ railgun since 2008 when BAE tested it (Which done damage slightly better than a tank round), and it only require 9MW power but since the power efficiency is not 100%, we are not too sure whether or not the Zumwalt Power Bank can actaully fire one of those thing. So, we are still using 5 inch guns on Zumwalt.
 
.
Well, to be precise, you will need 6 millions amp to shoot a 32MJ round at mach 7, to have that amount, you will need to have a generator that can generate a magnetic field strength of 10 tesla or above. Which would be about 1/4 of what it need for a EMALS launcher (which shoot about 120 MJ).

Can anyone do it? Well, yes this can be done, or else we wouldn't have Gerald Ford, theatrically, but if you have a 10 tesla magnetic field generator on board a close ship, you probably kill everyone in it with the EM wave. Which mean the structure have to be adapted to protect/shield personnel and equipment from the strong EM field.

On the other hand, while the ampere problem can be managed, you cannot shoot the gun if you do not have enough power, and since you cannot translate electricity power to kinetic energy without any loss, which mean even with Zumwalt, you probably cannot max out the power from the railgun anyway. Which is the reason why even tho we have a functioning 32MJ railgun since 2008 when BAE tested it (Which done damage slightly better than a tank round), and it only require 9MW power but since the power efficiency is not 100%, we are not too sure whether or not the Zumwalt Power Bank can actaully fire one of those thing. So, we are still using 5 inch guns on Zumwalt.
I think the danger of high EMF on ships can be avoided by building Faraday cage around the guns. But how to solve the problem with high heat that currently bring every metal to melt?

If reports are to believe, railgun can only fire a single shot. After firing, major parts of the gun are destroyed.
 
.
I think the danger of high EMF on ships can be avoided by building Faraday cage around the guns. But how to solve the problem with high heat that currently bring every metal to melt?

If reports are to believe, railgun can only fire a single shot. After firing, major parts of the gun are destroyed.

not sure, you probably need to make an open system for it.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom