Chinese electromagnetic launcher (railgun, coilgun .etc) informational pool

[Beast]

Chinese Railgun is also an experimental one. And the muzzle energy of BAE's railgun is also 32 MJ.

The new CCTV documentary talking about the Chinese woman scientist of railgun , claim the railgun trial is a big success and will implement on warship very soon. That is the different between Chinese railgun and American railgun. I am sure the Chinese rail gun install onboard LST will be 99% similar when install onboard 055 cruiser.

 

[clarkgap]

The new CCTV documentary talking about the Chinese woman scientist of railgun , claim the railgun trial is a big success and will implement on warship very soon. That is the different between Chinese railgun and American railgun. I am sure the Chinese rail gun install onboard LST will be 99% similar when install onboard 055 cruiser.

Seriously? In my memory, the document about the woman scientist had been posted in the thread. And fzgfzy had said the railgun even will not be installed on the Early variant of 055B.

 

[Beast]

Seriously? In my memory, the document about the woman scientist had been posted in the thread. And fzgfzy had said the railgun even will not be installed on the Early variant of 055B.

We also informed about Third carrier of PLAN will be using steam catapult by highly reliable insider. Guess what? PLAN skip steam and go straight for EMAL. I dare to bet with you, 055B will have railgun installed.

 

[Dante80]

Assuming 055B integrates the IPS developed for 002, it would certainly have the juice to support a railgun system. The theoretical combined output of 4 QC-280s stretches far above 100MW as the first step of the system. In comparison, the Zumwalt-class Destroyer that is touted to be the only current USN combatant compatible with the electricity requirements for a railgun produces something shy of 80MW.

I am under the impression though that this PLAN program will take a somewhat longer time to materialize.

 

[Figaro]

For all posters who still think that the National Interest is somewhat credible, let me give them a dose of their garbage ...
Does China's Navy Really Have a Railgun? (Or Is It a Hoax?)

Melodie Ha
April 5, 2018

In late January 2018, photos started circulating on social media showing a Chinese landing ship armed with a large gun turret fitted on its bow where the ship’s anti-aircraft turret would normally be. If confirmed to be a working prototype, China would be the first in the world to have a warship carrying an electromagnetic railgun (EMRG)—a new type of armament capable of posing a severe threat to U.S. forward-deployed forces. Despite sinking over $500 millioninto research and development, the U.S. Navy has thus far been unable to successfully produce the weapon. The absence of any information on the design and the testing of the railgun prototype from Chinese authorities, however, casts doubt on whether the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) prototype even works.

The development of rail guns and other directed-energy weapons are the future of maritime superiority. So, should the U.S. military be concerned about the Chinese ships with next-generation weapons? Until we see a fully operational Chinese railgun launch a projectile using electromagnetic energy, the answer is “no.”


An EMRG is a type of weapon that uses magnetic fields generated by enormous amounts of energy, rather than explosives, to fire warheads. The electricity launches an inert projectile up to 4,500 miles per hour (about Mach 8)—a velocity that would vaporize targets instantly through kinetic energy alone.

This Chinese development seems purposefully timed, as budget constraints recently compelled the U.S. Navy to reduce its EMRG program development. The United States has a long history and interest in these types of kinetic energy weapons, starting from the Reagan-era Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in the 1980s. America launched a prototype in 2005 and consequently awarded two contracts to BAE Systems and General Atomics to build an EMRG. Both companies delivered their working prototypes in 2012, but the United States has not yet been successful in fitting a working EMRG onto a warship.

The Chinese have also been investing in electromagnetic weapons research since the 1980s, but they have only recently indicated significant progress. The PLA Naval University of Engineering asserts that China is capable of deploying railguns on its ships thanks to an integrated electric propulsion system (IEPS), a state-of-the-art technology on naval vessels that which is integral to powering an EMRG. Rear Admiral Ma Weiming, one of China’s top experts on electromagnetic technology, announced for the first time in October 2017 that the Chinese military had a confirmed railgun program. More recently in March 2018, a PLA-run news source confirmed that sea tests of China’s EMRG are underway at the annual National People’s Congress in Beijing.

Beijing has been investing in new high-tech weapons to change the maritime balance of power in the Asia-Pacific, where the United States currently has a strong forward presence. An EMRG would be a game changer in defending the PLAN’s surface ships against missiles, and greatly increases the survivability of the fleet. This electromagnetic technology would also assist the PLAN in sea control and amphibious operations—important considerations for Beijing as it tries to enforce its vast maritime territorial claims in the East China Sea and South China Sea.

If Beijing successfully develops what experts say could be a working rail gun, then China would have accomplished something the United States has been working on for more than a decade and has not yet achieved. But based on the current evidence, this is implausible for three reasons.

First, there is no proof that the Chinese have figured out the technology for an operational rail gun on land, let alone the sea. China’s EMRG program is extremely young, and apart from vague proclamations from military officials that they have the ability to deploy such a weapon, we have not seen any proof of technical progress.

Second, a photo of a weapon mounted on an old Chinese warship cannot prove its capability. The photo could have easily been staged and spread on social media to raise a buzz in both Chinese and U.S. security communities.

Third, it is likely that the Chinese could be posturing to drum up nationalism and show that they are indeed technically proficient enough to challenge the U.S. Navy in the Asia-Pacific region. As China grows more aggressive in the region and makes bold claims on territory, a public proclamation of the possession of a breakthrough weapon could be their way of showing force.

The United States maintains maritime superiority in the Asia-Pacific, both technologically and strategically. It is, however, worth keeping an eye on China’s rapidly modernizing forces and dedication to deploying next-generation weaponry and electromagnetic technology. As of now, the Chinese simply aren't there yet.

Melodie Ha is a researcher with the Asia Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS).

Seriously? In my memory, the document about the woman scientist had been posted in the thread. And fzgfzy had said the railgun even will not be installed on the Early variant of 055B.

Yes, but it could certainly happen if tests go well. For instance, Fzgfzy did not believe that the 003 was going to be equipped with EM until last year ... things change.

 

[Dante80]

First, there is no proof that the Chinese have figured out the technology for an operational rail gun on land, let alone the sea. China’s EMRG program is extremely young, and apart from vague proclamations from military officials that they have the ability to deploy such a weapon, we have not seen any proof of technical progress.

Second, a photo of a weapon mounted on an old Chinese warship cannot prove its capability. The photo could have easily been staged and spread on social media to raise a buzz in both Chinese and U.S. security communities.

Third, it is likely that the Chinese could be posturing to drum up nationalism and show that they are indeed technically proficient enough to challenge the U.S. Navy in the Asia-Pacific region. As China grows more aggressive in the region and makes bold claims on territory, a public proclamation of the possession of a breakthrough weapon could be their way of showing force.

None of the three arguments pass the scrutiny test in my honest opinion, irregardless of the actual state the PLA EMRG program is at.

1. It is a pretty common fact in strategic analysis that China tends to publicly show (or let be seen) technology articles that are at least in the stage of active development.

2. A photo of a test article installed in a ship does not prove capability. It also certainly does not prove a targeted misinformation campaign. The argument destroys itself.

3. You cannot show force when there is no force in place to support your showing it. Political posturing is only effective when there is a fire behind the smoke. And over the years, the PLA has shown that maskirovka is a tertiary - at best - priority.

 

[Jlaw]

Melodie Ha

Enough said.

 

[Figaro]

None of the three arguments pass the scrutiny test in my honest opinion, irregardless of the actual state the PLA EMRG program is at.

1. It is a pretty common fact in strategic analysis that China tends to publicly show (or let be seen) technology articles that are at least in the stage of active development.

2. A photo of a test article installed in a ship does not prove capability. It also certainly does not prove a targeted misinformation campaign. The argument destroys itself.

3. You cannot show force when there is no force in place to support your showing it. Political posturing is only effective when there is a fire behind the smoke. And over the years, the PLA has shown that maskirovka is a tertiary - at best - priority.

Indeed. This is why most Western publications about Chinese military developments are unreliable. For every Chinese advancement, they either say it was stolen (via hacking) from the US or staged. The epitome of Western reporting ...

Enough said.

And yet people still believe these crappy websites. Pretty sad honestly

 

[pzkilo]

Indeed. This is why most Western publications about Chinese military developments are unreliable. For every Chinese advancement, they either say it was stolen (via hacking) from the US or staged. The epitome of Western reporting ...


And yet people still believe these crappy websites. Pretty sad honestly

Steal、copy、hack blablablabla, I usually wonder why most western publications are so fking stupid, but the most ridiculous thing that surprise me is western ppl believe it without doubt.

 

[cirr]

Performances:

length: under 10m
power consumption per discharge: 58KWh
conversion efficiency: circa 30%(room for improvement against the theoretical value of 50%)
muzzle energy: just under 64MJ
muzzle velocity: 2500m/s
projectile weight: 20km
when fired at high angle: max. altitude 160km, max. range 480km

I am not responsible for the validity of the above info.

 

[LKJ86]

 

[clarkgap]

Performances:

length: under 10m
power consumption per discharge: 58KWh
conversion efficiency: circa 30%(room for improvement against the theoretical value of 50%)
muzzle energy: just under 64MJ
muzzle velocity: 2500m/s
projectile weight: 20km
when fired at high angle: max. altitude 160km, max. range 480km

I am not responsible for the validity of the above info.

It is refer to an ideal railgun in a journal. Base on the data from 光华科技奖, the ground-base rialgun-prototype is still 32MJ.

 

[Brainsucker]

I'm curious, with that big gun, won't the recoil make the ship unbalanced? Or Railgun doesn't make a recoil when fired?

 

[clarkgap]

I'm curious, with that big gun, won't the recoil make the ship unbalanced? Or Railgun doesn't make a recoil when fired?

Conservation of momentum: m1*v1=m2*v2
The mass of projectile is approximately 10 kg, and tonnage of 072 is over 3700000 kg. You can determine that.

 

[LKJ86]