What's new

Is this an experimental rail gun on Chinese ship

Railguns have only around half that range, and that would be a great way to melt the barrel. And a land based railgun just seems impractical considering the size, weight, and power required. It'd be immobile and vulnerable to missile and counterbattery fire. Your scenario is unlikely to say the least.
Actually, your railguns have half that range and your railgun barrels melt. That's why your railgun program is canceled and ours are doing ship testing.

Now this is going to be like 1945 when only USA had the atom bomb. Let's see who we can use this thing on without any way of fighting back...
 
Actually, your railguns have half that range and your railgun barrels melt. That's why your railgun program is canceled and ours are doing ship testing.

Now this is going to be like 1945 when only USA had the atom bomb. Let's see who we can use this thing on without any way of fighting back...

The US railgun program is NOT canceled. An there is NO evidence that a Chinese railgun has twice the range, and higher barrel quality than the US. The only thing China has proven is that they can mount it to a ship. Your hyper nationalist colors are showing.

Which brings me back to HVP. The US can move out on HVP much faster and to far more barrels than they can with EMR.
 
OMG! Time to build a 50000ton BB to carry seven 3-gun turrets! the beast of our age!!!
sounds nice with 7x3 guns, like a game changer. ok let´s see, to fire a gun you need to load the gun with an energy from several MW to 1,000 MW. Lets take average 500 MW for a gun, so you need 10,500 MW to fire a round out of 21 guns. I think you need a fleet of oil or gas tankers to support a single gunship. the energy must come from somewhere. ok unless you install railguns on nuclear ships. Lets hope the nuclear ship does not explode while loading, otherwise China will become a wasteland for 1,000 years. ah don´t forget you need time too, to load the condensators to energize the guns. probably 1 hour for a round. ok maybe with the technology improving, loading time can be shortended.

good luck for peaceful rise of China
 

Looks like China just installed a railgun on a warship, beating the U.S. Navy to the punch
Railguns are another way the PLAN hopes to get an edge in 21st-century naval warfare.
By Jeffrey Lin and P.W. Singer

type_055a.jpg

TYPE 055A

This fan-made computer-generated image of the Type 055A destroyer shows it with a railgun in place of the 130mm cannon found on the Type 055 (though the Type 055A may use a stealthier railgun turret).

baoxiuyuan

Pictures surfacing online appear to show a new weapon developed in China. The nation may have just installed a full-scale railgun on a warship, something even the United States Navy has yet to do.

bae_railgun_graphic.png

HOW RAILGUNS WORK
This BAE graphic illustrates the basic principles behind railgun technology, as well as its advantages: high launch speed and range, affordability, and high firing volume). Chinese railguns on the Type 055A destroyer would likely have similar characteristics.
BAE

Railguns use electromagnetic energy, rather than gunpowder, to sling a projectile. The concept has been incredibly appealing to militaries, as the weapon offers the speed and efficiency of a cannon, but with the range of a missile.

936_railgun_2.jpg

A GLOBAL FIRST
Type 072III landing ship tank (LST) Haiyang Shan, #936, would be the world's first railgun-armed warship. Its small size and lack of combat features means that it will likely be used to test and validate the technologies of the railgun.
Da Feng Cao

Photos shared on Twitter show that the Chinese Navy's Type 072III landing ship tank (LST) Haiyang Shan, #936, has a new turret installed on its bow, replacing the H/PJ76F 37mm anti-aircraft turret. There are also three shipping containers.

936_railgun_close_up.jpg

CLOSE-UP
The entire railgun measures roughly 65 feet from turret rear to barrel muzzle, with the barrel itself about 33 feet long, and 12-20 feet in diameter. Such a wide barrel provides room for the parallel magnetic rails that propel metal projectiles to speeds of over Mach 7.
AndrewTear

The turret spotted indicates the presence of a railgun. It's large, for one, with a barrel that measures 26-33 feet in length and 12 to 20 inches in diameter. That's 2-3 times the cannon caliber of conventional tube artillery barrels, which generally have a diameter-to-caliber ratio of 1.25:1. Alternatively, a 350-400mm naval mortar could explain the the barrel diameter and length, but such a large mortar would be hilariously unnecessary.

Due to weight issues, there is virtually no reason for a conventional cannon to have this kind of diameter-to-caliber ratio, and so the barrel's size likely accommodates magnetic rails to propel shells to hypersonic speeds. The shipping containers are another indicator; it's likely they contain some sort of power equipment, like generators or capacitors.

Its barrel length makes the Chinese railgun similar in size to the BAE 32 megajoule railgun built for U.S. Navy testing. The BAE system is designed to fire 22-pound projectiles at Mach 7 speeds to more than 100 miles.

usn_railgun.jpg

USN RAILGUN
Despite previous efforts to install this multi-megawatt railgun on the USNS Trenton, shifting budget priorities in late 2017 may mean that this railgun may never be carried on a USN warship.
US Navy

The United States had earlier planned to install a railgun prototype on the USNS Trenton fast transport in 2016, but this was postponed for budgetary reasons. In fact, current railgun research funding has been reported as in trouble, as the Pentagon focuses first on equipping conventional naval guns with the railgun's low-drag, high-speed ammunition.

936_railgun_installation.jpg

A WORK IN PROGRESS
This photo—recently released though taken in fall 2017 but just released—shows the #936 during modifications. The supposed railgun turret is under tarps.
Chinese Internet

China's advancing work in railgun and other electromagnetic technologies shouldn't come as a surprise. In addition to copious open-source research by Chinese scientists, a program led by Rear Admiral Ma Weiming has in the past hired Chinese military engineers to build state-of-the-art electromagnetically assisted launch system (EMALS) catapults for future Chinese aircraft carriers. The program also built integrated electrical propulsion systems (IEPS) to meet the electrical needs of future Chinese warships.

And keep in mind: just because the railgun is there doesn't mean the railgun actually works. Engineers for this test, as with all other railgun work, will have to overcome formidable challenges in material durability, power storage, and projectile guidance. If successful, however, it would offer China a game-changing capability. A working railgun would likely be installed on future versions of the Type 055 destroyer, which makes sense considering the vessel has been reported to have IEPS, which would meet the electrical demands of railguns and other direct-energy weapons like lasers.

In terms of benefits, the railguns' hypersonic (Mach 5+), long-range projectiles would be perfect for cheaply and quickly knocking out high-threat air targets like ballistic missiles, aircraft, and even future hypersonic vehicles. The long range would also come in handy for missions like anti-ship warfare, supplementing shorter-ranged antiship ballistic and cruise missiles. Finally, such long-ranged artillery would be a significant addition to long-range bombardment of ground targets.

Peter Warren Singer is a strategist and senior fellow at the New America Foundation. He has been named by Defense News as one of the 100 most influential people in defense issues. He was also dubbed an official "Mad Scientist" for the U.S. Army's Training and Doctrine Command. Jeffrey Lin is a national security professional in the greater D.C. area.

https://www.popsci.com/china-navy-railgun-warship#page-4
 
Last edited:
I'm starting to see a pattern here.:lol:

Senate Votes to End Production of Controversial F-22 Fighter
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/21/AR2009072100135.html

China unveils J-20.
SIPmb5h.jpg


USAF cancels AMRAAM replacement
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-cancels-amraam-replacement-368249/

China unveils PL-15.
grmVFxT.jpg


Army Terminates XM25 Contract; Airburst Weapon's Future Uncertain
https://www.military.com/kitup/2017/05/xm25.html

China unveils ZH-05.
nIPXEqs.jpg


Construction to begin in May 2018 for USN’s first Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyer.
http://www.janes.com/article/76966/...may-for-usn-s-first-arleigh-burke-flight-iii-

055 launched in 2017.
Ly7xnN5.jpg


Railgun potentially cancelled: what went wrong for the US superweapon?
https://www.naval-technology.com/comment/railgun-potentially-cancelled-went-wrong-us-superweapon/

Chinese railgun not cancelled.
7RHWf8Z.jpg


:lol:
 
I'm starting to see a pattern here.:lol:

Senate Votes to End Production of Controversial F-22 Fighter
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/21/AR2009072100135.html

China unveils J-20.
SIPmb5h.jpg


USAF cancels AMRAAM replacement
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-cancels-amraam-replacement-368249/

China unveils PL-15.
grmVFxT.jpg


Army Terminates XM25 Contract; Airburst Weapon's Future Uncertain
https://www.military.com/kitup/2017/05/xm25.html

China unveils ZH-05.
nIPXEqs.jpg


Construction to begin in May 2018 for USN’s first Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyer.
http://www.janes.com/article/76966/...may-for-usn-s-first-arleigh-burke-flight-iii-

055 launched in 2017.
Ly7xnN5.jpg


Railgun potentially cancelled: what went wrong for the US superweapon?
https://www.naval-technology.com/comment/railgun-potentially-cancelled-went-wrong-us-superweapon/

Chinese railgun not cancelled.
7RHWf8Z.jpg


:lol:
OMG
 
I'm starting to see a pattern here.:lol:

Senate Votes to End Production of Controversial F-22 Fighter
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/21/AR2009072100135.html

China unveils J-20.
SIPmb5h.jpg


USAF cancels AMRAAM replacement
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-cancels-amraam-replacement-368249/

China unveils PL-15.
grmVFxT.jpg


Army Terminates XM25 Contract; Airburst Weapon's Future Uncertain
https://www.military.com/kitup/2017/05/xm25.html

China unveils ZH-05.
nIPXEqs.jpg


Construction to begin in May 2018 for USN’s first Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyer.
http://www.janes.com/article/76966/...may-for-usn-s-first-arleigh-burke-flight-iii-

055 launched in 2017.
Ly7xnN5.jpg


Railgun potentially cancelled: what went wrong for the US superweapon?
https://www.naval-technology.com/comment/railgun-potentially-cancelled-went-wrong-us-superweapon/

Chinese railgun not cancelled.
7RHWf8Z.jpg


:lol:

The SP12 F-22 above, however, believes otherwise. I wonder what India is going to do about that? Import more? Or engage in wet-fantasies about a non-existing quad?
 
The SP12 F-22 above, however, believes otherwise. I wonder what India is going to do about that? Import more? Or engage n wet-fantasies about a non-existing quad?
of course to announce a plan that SP2012 "WILL have a super super railgun by 2020", just like their announcement about a super super computer (130E!!) by 2017.
 
of course to announce a plan that SP2012 "WILL have a super super railgun by 2020", just like their announcement about a super super computer (130E!!) by 2017.

But I have full confidence that they will do China-beating supercomputer by 2017. Much earlier than China makes its own China-beating supercomputer.
 
The SP12 F-22 above, however, believes otherwise. I wonder what India is going to do about that? Import more? Or engage in wet-fantasies about a non-existing quad?
They will claim whatever US can’t do it. Other is even impossible. They believe the world is revolving around US and India only. All other are irrelevant. But that happens only in their fantasy :enjoy:

The US railgun program is NOT canceled. An there is NO evidence that a Chinese railgun has twice the range, and higher barrel quality than the US. The only thing China has proven is that they can mount it to a ship. Your hyper nationalist colors are showing.

Which brings me back to HVP. The US can move out on HVP much faster and to far more barrels than they can with EMR.
Typical nationalism from self center US who think the world is revolving around US only. So sad for you.

Welcome to the real world where there is China and other countries that exist and share this world, be it technology or economy power. :enjoy:
 
I'm starting to see a pattern here.:lol:

Senate Votes to End Production of Controversial F-22 Fighter
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/21/AR2009072100135.html

China unveils J-20.
SIPmb5h.jpg


USAF cancels AMRAAM replacement
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-cancels-amraam-replacement-368249/

China unveils PL-15.
grmVFxT.jpg


Army Terminates XM25 Contract; Airburst Weapon's Future Uncertain
https://www.military.com/kitup/2017/05/xm25.html

China unveils ZH-05.
nIPXEqs.jpg


Construction to begin in May 2018 for USN’s first Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyer.
http://www.janes.com/article/76966/...may-for-usn-s-first-arleigh-burke-flight-iii-

055 launched in 2017.
Ly7xnN5.jpg


Railgun potentially cancelled: what went wrong for the US superweapon?
https://www.naval-technology.com/comment/railgun-potentially-cancelled-went-wrong-us-superweapon/

Chinese railgun not cancelled.
7RHWf8Z.jpg


:lol:
I believe it would be "un-canceled" soon.
 
Lets take average 500 MW for a gun
500MW for a gun? Haha, are you mad?
You didn't notice the small size of the landing ship that mounted with the rail gun? You really believe such a small size ship (4000ton) could carry a 500MW power package? 500MW is equivalent to a normal thermal power plant on the land, no chance for such a small ship to carry with.

The only thing I can tell you is, the power requirement of the rail gun is significantly less than the 500MW threshold that you put.

Lets hope the nuclear ship does not explode while loading, otherwise China will become a wasteland for 1,000 years.
Safety is always our top priority. So we will do the charge test at a much safe place, for example on the west wing of the nine-dash line in the South China Sea.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom