Yeah I meant the other thing. Railguns on ships would be SO SWEET.
Transformers 2!
[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;26623648]So instead of putting more money on NASA, general science research, schools e.t.c, they spend it on finding better ways to bomb the arabs?[/QUOTE]
It wouldn't be bombing them because
[QUOTE=The Image]No explosive warheads[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Tovleman;26632357]"Guys! There is nations in hunger, the economy is shit, north korea is bombing south. What shall we do?"
"Build, railgun"[/QUOTE]
We could use railguns to launch food and medicine into poor countries.
[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;26623648]So instead of putting more money on NASA, general science research, schools e.t.c, they spend it on finding better ways to bomb the arabs?[/QUOTE]
Replacing conventional explosives with ammunition that leave no unexploded ordinance, don't leave residual effects (Agent Orange, Nuclear Weapons, etc.), and are highly accurate?
Sounds worth the money to me. Remember Vietnam War? Agent Orange didn't go down so well.
[img]http://www.galeon.com/armasonline/documentos/image2/k80/k801.gif[/img]
I don't get what you guys are so amazed about, rail guns have been around forever.
It was a good try.
I don't understand the point of this though
We started with unguided projectiles (Cannon Balls) and we've made it to guided warheads that can go much further than that with extreme precision regardless of weather conditions... Back to just glorified cannon balls? Even with guided warheads being shot from this thing, isn't it better to just use what we have now?
It's cool as shit, but seems kind of backwards as far as weapons go
[QUOTE=TheTalon;26642662]I don't understand the point of this though
We started with unguided projectiles (Cannon Balls) and we've made it to guided warheads that can go much further than that with extreme precision regardless of weather conditions... Back to just glorified cannon balls? Even with guided warheads being shot from this thing, isn't it better to just use what we have now?
It's cool as shit, but seems kind of backwards as far as weapons go[/QUOTE]
This is just a chunk of metal going really fast. Explosives might not work properly - ie. it doesn't blow up/doesn't blow up on impact but stays armed till some kid steps on it and flies to the moon. This has a 100% chance of working unless the laws of physics suddenly change in the area it's targeting.
[QUOTE=TheTalon;26642662]I don't understand the point of this though
We started with unguided projectiles (Cannon Balls) and we've made it to guided warheads that can go much further than that with extreme precision regardless of weather conditions... Back to just glorified cannon balls? Even with guided warheads being shot from this thing, isn't it better to just use what we have now?
It's cool as shit, but seems kind of backwards as far as weapons go[/QUOTE]
Glorified fucking cannonball?
This thing could probably fucking hit countries on the other side of a fucking country, Oh what's that Iran you're immune to naval bombardment, not any more you're not! *fires rail gun* Good night!
And to be honest the destruction caused by a rail gun bombardment would cause an entire nation to shit brick with fervour and energy rarely seen except in coke heads and meth addicts.
[QUOTE=bravehat;26629412]Well in that case a tungsten rod the size of a telephone pole would be similar to a small nuclear warhead, Rods from God man, rods from god.[/QUOTE]
Telephone poles are already rods from God
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucBBf0lWJyA&feature=related[/media]
Where are they getting the microfusion cells to run it?
This isn't what we need, it's large, inefficient, cumbersome and heavy.
What we [I]do[/I] need to is find Tesla's long lost notes on his "small" Experiment in the Russian wild.
Then find a way to selectively arc the energy produced into one spot.
EMP+Melting power.
Total Military control.
[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;26644628]This isn't what we need, it's large, inefficient, cumbersome and heavy.
What we [I]do[/I] need to is find Tesla's long lost notes on his "small" Experiment in the Russian wild.
Then find a way to selectively arc the energy produced into one spot.
EMP+Melting power.
Total Military control.[/QUOTE]
Tesla Coils?
Yeah, Tesla's "Teleforce" weapon would be even harder to create than a fully operational rail gun.
So maybe after the Navy's finished building this they could attempt that.
Tesla is my favorite Mysterious 20th century inventor.
[QUOTE=bravehat;26643782]Glorified fucking cannonball?
This thing could probably fucking hit countries on the other side of a fucking country, Oh what's that Iran you're immune to naval bombardment, not any more you're not! *fires rail gun* Good night!
And to be honest the destruction caused by a rail gun bombardment would cause an entire nation to shit brick with fervour and energy rarely seen except in coke heads and meth addicts.[/QUOTE]
It's still kinda like a cannonball. You're shooting something heavy really fast towards your target. Kinetic energy does the damage. Not that there's nothing wrong with that. There's just so so much more of that energy than with a cannonball.
[QUOTE=TheTalon;26642662]I don't understand the point of this though
We started with unguided projectiles (Cannon Balls) and we've made it to guided warheads that can go much further than that with extreme precision regardless of weather conditions... Back to just glorified cannon balls? Even with guided warheads being shot from this thing, isn't it better to just use what we have now?
It's cool as shit, but seems kind of backwards as far as weapons go[/QUOTE]
It does massive damage. It's pretty much unstoppable. It goes so fast that it's highly unlikely that you're gonna hit it with anything, let alone make it stop. Quite effective for immobile targets.
You can take down missiles, but you cant take down this, for example.
[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;26644628]This isn't what we need, it's large, inefficient, cumbersome and heavy.
What we [I]do[/I] need to is find Tesla's long lost notes on his "small" Experiment in the Russian wild.
Then find a way to selectively arc the energy produced into one spot.
EMP+Melting power.
Total Military control.[/QUOTE]
The one that flattened a few miles of forest?
Reminds me of the MAC gun in Halo
[QUOTE=Nerts;26645887]The one that flattened a few miles of forest?[/QUOTE]
Yep.
[editline]12th December 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=PEn1s lol;26644792]Tesla Coils?[/QUOTE]
Like TheDecryptor said, Its called the Teleforce.
Tesla coils look like baby (electrical) transformers when compared to the Teleforce.
[editline]12th December 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;26645081]Yeah, Tesla's "Teleforce" weapon would be even harder to create than a fully operational rail gun.
So maybe after the Navy's finished building this they could attempt that.[/QUOTE]
[quote=MUTHA FUCKIN 1940s TESLA]
In 1940 Tesla estimated that each station would cost no more than $2,000,000 and could have been constructed in a few months.
[/quote][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleforce#cite_note-4"][/URL]
It's not that impressive.
Germans achived 80 miles with a conventional cannon in 1916.
[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;26649270]It's not that impressive.
Germans achived 80 miles with a conventional cannon in 1916.[/QUOTE]
Wow that's really marvelous and completely irrelevant in every way imaginable.
Oh sorry, I can see how irrelevant is one long-range weapon towards another.
[QUOTE=3v3ryb0dy;26649497]Oh sorry, I can see how irrelevant is one long-range weapon towards another.[/QUOTE]
Different projectiles, different uses, different firing methods. That's like coming into a discussion of some new rifle being developed and saying "Big deal the Americans killed two hundred thousand people with a single bomb in 1945!"
[editline]12th December 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=TheTalon;26642662]I don't understand the point of this though
We started with unguided projectiles (Cannon Balls) and we've made it to guided warheads that can go much further than that with extreme precision regardless of weather conditions... Back to just glorified cannon balls? Even with guided warheads being shot from this thing, isn't it better to just use what we have now?
It's cool as shit, but seems kind of backwards as far as weapons go[/QUOTE]
The Navy is thinking about space warfare, it seems. Don't need propellant to get these fuckers going, and one hole in an enemy vessel and their goose is cooked.
[QUOTE=kirderf;26623576]How are they planning to power them on-board ships?[/QUOTE]
They use a nuclear reactor to generate the 1.21 giggawatts it requires.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;26649729]Different projectiles, different uses, different firing methods. That's like coming into a discussion of some new rifle being developed and saying "Big deal the Americans killed two hundred thousand people with a single bomb in 1945!"
[editline]12th December 2010[/editline]
The Navy is thinking about space warfare, it seems. Don't need propellant to get these fuckers going, and one hole in an enemy vessel and their goose is cooked.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that's their goal for now.
Explosive warheads have their limitations.
If you've got the power, you can pretty much scale up a railgun.
A kinetic missile is much more powerful against bunkers and armored objectives. And i imagine the costs being significantly lower too despite the power consumption.
Rockets and explosives expire and need constant care. A slug of precious metals will not need care and is much cheaper to make.
[QUOTE=sami-elite;26650101]I don't think that's their goal for now.[/QUOTE]
I know bro I was joking
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
