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

[Manidabest]

sounds good!!!

 

[cirr]

 

[Akasa]

View attachment 463603

Railgun speed of 2500 m/s and produces 32 MJ of muzzle energy. A bit behind the new BAe railgun, but a good start nonetheless.

 

[atan651]

It's going to be a force (weapon) to be reckoned with. Go China!

 

[cirr]

Railgun speed of 2500 m/s and produces 32 MJ of muzzle energy. A bit behind the new BAe railgun, but a good start nonetheless.

New BAE railgun? Where is it? shipboard yet?

We are here talking about shipboard/ready for deployment railgun.

As for land-based testbeds, 64MJ is NO problem.

 

[Akasa]

New BAE railgun? Where is it? shipboard yet?

We are here talking about shipboard/ready for deployment railgun.

As for land-based testbeds, 64MJ is NO problem.

Why are you so concerned about it being shipborne when it can already match or out-shoot the Chinese railgun?

Where is the evidence that the Chinese are capable of building a 64 MJ weapon?

 

[Beast]

Why are you so concerned about it being shipborne when it can already match or out-shoot the Chinese railgun?

Where is the evidence that the Chinese are capable of building a 64 MJ weapon?

Of cos ship borne is important becos that means it is ready or combat readiness while BAE is only testing phase. I can bet BAE is not combat ready. Maybe after fired a dozen Rds and it exhausted the system and heavy maintenance require for it to work again.

While Chinese one is combat ready and is practical to be used in combat, capable of firing hundred over times.

In testing, you can have all kind of fantastic spec but when comes to operation all this spec is useless.

 

[Dante80]

While Chinese one is combat ready and is practical to be used in combat, capable of firing hundred over times.

Hello. This is interesting, I was under the assumption that the Chinese rail gun system was not ready to be fielded yet, but started testing trials. No idea how advanced these are, but in any case you would need a platform for fielding it (I was under the assumption that the current PLAN main units do not have the electrical infrastructure to field said weapons, and that IPS systems in possible new 052 / 055 variants yet to be constructed would rectify this).

 

[JSCh]

From cjdby.net.
Photo said to be taken this morning around 9, ship moving down stream.

 

[cirr]

From cjdby.net.
Photo said to be taken this morning around 9, ship moving down stream.

A new round of shipboard tests under way

 

[clarkgap]

New BAE railgun? Where is it? shipboard yet?

We are here talking about shipboard/ready for deployment railgun.

As for land-based testbeds, 64MJ is NO problem.

That report told about the land-base 32 MJ - 2500 m/s launch succession, not on ship.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Of cos ship borne is important becos that means it is ready or combat readiness while BAE is only testing phase. I can bet BAE is not combat ready. Maybe after fired a dozen Rds and it exhausted the system and heavy maintenance require for it to work again.

While Chinese one is combat ready and is practical to be used in combat, capable of firing hundred over times.

In testing, you can have all kind of fantastic spec but when comes to operation all this spec is useless.

An ignorant question, but can someone clarify the advantages of Rail Guns over conventional chemical energy based weaponry and artillery?

I used to think that cost was the main determinant because Rail Gun was substantially cheaper, however I was disabused of such notion when someone pointed out that one single round of a rail gun can cost upto a million USD.

So perhaps someone can help clarify?

 

[Dante80]

So perhaps someone can help clarify?

Taken as a starter, from English Wikipedia.

Railguns are being researched as weapons with projectiles that do not contain explosives or propellants, but are given extremely high velocities: 2,500 m/s (approximately Mach 7 at sea level) or more. For comparison, the M16 rifle has a muzzle speed of 930 m/s , and the 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 gun that armed World War II American battleships has a muzzle speed of 760 m/s), which because of its much greater projectile mass (up to 2,700 pounds) generated a muzzle energy of 360 MJ and a downrange kinetic impact of energy of over 160 MJ.

By firing smaller projectiles at extremely high velocities, railguns may yield kinetic energy impacts equal or superior to the destructive energy of 5"/54 caliber Mark 45 gun Naval guns, (which achieve up to 10MJ at the muzzle), but with much greater range. This decreases ammunition size and weight, allowing more ammunition to be carried and eliminating the hazards of carrying explosives or propellants in a naval weapons platform. Also, by firing more aerodynamically streamlined projectiles at greater velocities, railguns may achieve greater range, less time to target, and at shorter ranges less wind drift, bypassing the physical limitations of conventional firearms: "the limits of gas expansion prohibit launching an unassisted projectile to velocities greater than about 1.5 km/s and ranges of more than 50 miles [80 km] from a practical conventional gun system."

There is more.

Railguns are also being examined for use as anti-aircraft weapons to intercept air threats, particularly anti-ship cruise missiles, in addition to land bombardment. A supersonic sea-skimming anti-ship missile can appear over the horizon 20 miles from a warship, leaving a very short reaction time for a ship to intercept it. Even if conventional defense systems react fast enough, they are expensive and only a limited number of large interceptors can be carried.

A railgun projectile can reach several times the speed of sound faster than a missile; because of this, it can hit a target, such as a cruise missile, much faster and farther away from the ship. Projectiles are also typically much cheaper and smaller, allowing for many more to be carried (they have no guidance systems, and rely on the railgun to supply their kinetic energy, rather than providing it themselves).

The speed, cost, and numerical advantages of railgun systems may allow them to replace several different systems in the current layered defense approach. A railgun projectile without the ability to change course can hit fast-moving missiles at a maximum range of 30 nmi (56 km).

As is the case with the Phalanx CIWS, unguided railgun rounds will require multiple/many shots to bring down maneuvering supersonic anti-ship missiles, with the odds of hitting the missile improving dramatically the closer it gets.

Now...regarding the cost. You "spend" the following when firing a railgun.

1. Electricity.
2. Durability on the weapons platform (rail + supporting electrical apparatus).
3. Projectile.

The first one is assumed to be free from a cost point of view. If you have the juice, you hurl the projectile.
The second one is a factor observing a rounds fired (before destruction) to platform cost ratio.
The third one strictly depends on the projectile at hand. Currently, the projections for unguided projectiles give a very small cost. The projections for guided projectiles cannot be ascertained right now, but you can get a feel of the situation by reading what the current guidance development projects try to accomplish. For example, here is the USN RFP Navy SBIR 2012.1 – Topic N121-102, describing the specifications for making a guidance package for a railgun projectile:

The package must fit within the mass (< 2 kg), diameter (< 40 mm outer diameter), and volume (200 cm3) constraints of the projectile and do so without altering the center of gravity. It should also be able to survive accelerations of at least 20,000 g (threshold) / 40,000 g (objective) in all axes, high electromagnetic fields (E > 5,000 V/m, B > 2 T), and surface temperatures of > 800 deg C. The package should be able to operate in the presence of any plasma that may form in the bore or at the muzzle exit and must also be radiation hardened due to exo-atmospheric flight. Total power consumption must be less than 8 watts (threshold)/5 watts (objective) and the battery life must be at least 5 minutes (from initial launch) to enable operation during the entire engagement. In order to be affordable, the production cost per projectile must be as low as possible, with a goal of less than $1,000 per unit.

 

[Beast]

An ignorant question, but can someone clarify the advantages of Rail Guns over conventional chemical energy based weaponry and artillery?

I used to think that cost was the main determinant because Rail Gun was substantially cheaper, however I was disabused of such notion when someone pointed out that one single round of a rail gun can cost upto a million USD.

So perhaps someone can help clarify?

US rail gun is just an experimental gun. It is not put into near service yet and due to the tremendous Joule or energy provided. After firing a few rounds will require massive overhaul or maintenance.

Just like F-22, it needs aircon hangar and repeat recoating just after few dozen hrs of flight. There is a reason why US defense wants to keep the number of F-22 at 187.

Chinese has very likely solve the problem of magnetic distribution consistent and minimize many parts small enough to fit onboard ship. They also managed to reach a point where their railgun is not as maintenance extensive like the BAE.

BAE prototype railgun spec is far superior than Chinese gun but it is also the very reason to cause such low usage lvl and high cost of their railgun that prohibit further testing.

 

[clarkgap]

US rail gun is just an experimental gun. It is not put into near service yet and due to the tremendous Joule or energy provided. After firing a few rounds will require massive overhaul or maintenance.

Just like F-22, it needs aircon hangar and repeat recoating just after few dozen hrs of flight. There is a reason why US defense wants to keep the number of F-22 at 187.

Chinese has very likely solve the problem of magnetic distribution consistent and minimize many parts small enough to fit onboard ship. They also managed to reach a point where their railgun is not as maintenance extensive like the BAE.

BAE prototype railgun spec is far superior than Chinese gun but it is also the very reason to cause such low usage lvl and high cost of their railgun that prohibit further testing.

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