Article

2010-12-29 Science & Technology

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-12-29 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ] Top

#1 Just how do you armor a ship against a 64MJ round? Or will everyone be building new versions of HMS Hood...

Posted by Bill Griling5080 2010-12-29 00:29|| 2010-12-29 00:29|| Front Page Top

#2 "MOTHERSHIP" CONCEPT + IMO indics or infers that in future, DIFFERENTIATED MAJOR WARSHIP CLASSES WILL HAD MERGED INTO ONE, which in turn could be deemed as the GRANDDADDY/GODZILLA OF ALL "SUPER-ARSENAL SHIP" DESIGNS.

I suspect the above is the real, hush-hush reason for the UK'S "QUEEN ELIZABETH"-CLASS CVF HAVING TWO ISLANDS [Fwd, Aft], + WHY TO BUILD TWO CVFS BUT MOTHBALL ONE OF SAME.

IOW, CVFS = notsomuch an [avant-garde]AIRCRAFT CARRIER AS AN "UN-IMPROVED" FUTURE ARSENAL SHIP = ALL PURPOSE/SYS MOTHERSHIP.

The only thing it can't do is SUBMERGE like a Submarine ... ... ... OR DOES IT???

[DAS BOOT Movie here].

We should also the UK's present serious lack of cash, which lends to the dev of COST, MISSION-EFFECTIVE CONSOLIDATED DESIGNS.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2010-12-29 00:36|| 2010-12-29 00:36|| Front Page Top

#3 Kool.

How does one steer a hypervelocity inert object to the desired point of impact 200 miles away?
More show than go, methinks.

Of course when the munition has a blast radius the MOA becomes a little relaxed.

Posted by Skidmark 2010-12-29 00:41|| 2010-12-29 00:41|| Front Page Top

#4 Just how do you armor a ship against a 64MJ round?

Build it out of the equivalent of paper mache.

I say bring back the Iowa class battleships if you want to sling really large projectiles. Retrofit them with nuclear reactors. You'll need something massive to not be tipped over by the reactionary forces involved.

You could make some awe-inspiring area-effect weapons with this that would work great against incoming missiles, swarm attacks, and pirates.

Even if you just shot it into the water right in front of the target.

Rail shotgun, anyone?

Posted by gorb 2010-12-29 01:36|| 2010-12-29 01:36|| Front Page Top

#5 I doubt Bill Griling, that any armor could defend against such a weapon. Anyone with this ship had also be careful against planes, subs or rockets.

Posted by Bernardz 2010-12-29 07:44|| 2010-12-29 07:44|| Front Page Top

#6 Let's presume we have a M5 proje weighing half a ton impacting in a terrain of dirt and a few rocks. Is a solid shot as good for anti-personnel/anti-armor as HE or dispersing submunitions?
Second, can HE or submunis survive the accel of a M5 or M7 railgun?

Posted by Richard Aubrey 2010-12-29 10:42|| 2010-12-29 10:42|| Front Page Top

#7 Any electronics couldn't.

Posted by gorb 2010-12-29 10:57|| 2010-12-29 10:57|| Front Page Top

#8 Gorb.
Could you hit a moving target, such as a tank, with a solid shot from an M5 gun forty miles away?
No? Then we're talking about hitting ships at a distance and aircraft closer in. Troop support is not included.
Not that it's a bad thing to be able to hit targets vulnerable to solid shot. But even something like a hardened Excalibur round wouldn't work. So accuracy without mid-course guidance or homing...?
What, exactly, could you plan on hitting?
Curiouser and curioser.
Extremely high velocity rounds taking less and less time to target reduce the chance of missing by reducing the time available for aiming inaccuracy to multiply to a miss. But that means being on target the first time.
Anti-aircraft, maybe.

Posted by Richard Aubrey 2010-12-29 11:09|| 2010-12-29 11:09|| Front Page Top

#9 Let's presume we have a M5 proje weighing half a ton impacting in a terrain of dirt and a few rocks. Is a solid shot as good for anti-personnel/anti-armor as HE or dispersing submunitions?

At that speed, everything near it becomes anti-personnel and anti-armor. Basically you have a meteor impacting at those speeds and everything near it gets vaporized by the heat/shockwave or a little farther away gets shredded by the debris.

Second, can HE or submunis survive the accel of a M5 or M7 railgun?
Depends on how much shock the HE is subjected to and how much heat is generated. But, as shown above a HE version really isn't needed at those speeds.

Posted by DarthVader 2010-12-29 11:09|| 2010-12-29 11:09|| Front Page Top

#10 Would it be effective against bunkers?

Posted by DoDo 2010-12-29 11:47|| 2010-12-29 11:47|| Front Page Top

#11 IIRC, the intent is to have a weapon that shoots dumb, solid projectiles - they rely on kinetic energy alone for their destructive power. They are also primarily intended for shore bombardment of fixed targets, rather than moving targets like tanks. The idea of shooting down airplanes and missiles seems like a stretch, too. The railgun itself will be fairly massive, and not too easy to aim at a fast moving target.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2010-12-29 11:51|| 2010-12-29 11:51|| Front Page Top

#12 I don't think its so much the impact (which I guess is impressive) but the rate of fire. One every 2 seconds - even one every 5 would be devastating. What was the rate for those big guns on the Iowa class battleships? What is the rate-of-fire for a missle launcher?

I wonder if you could put one of these on a sub...

Posted by CrazyFool 2010-12-29 11:58|| 2010-12-29 11:58|| Front Page Top

#13 Could you hit a moving target, such as a tank, with a solid shot from an M5 gun forty miles away?
No?

That's correct.

Then we're talking about hitting ships at a distance and aircraft closer in.

Occasionally.

Troop support is not included.

With a 200 mile range, troop support will become important I feel.

Not that it's a bad thing to be able to hit targets vulnerable to solid shot. But even something like a hardened Excalibur round wouldn't work. So accuracy without mid-course guidance or homing...?
What, exactly, could you plan on hitting?
Curiouser and curioser.

Incoming missiles, swarm attacks (by torpedo boats over water), and pirates are part of it. But you could use it on troop and equipment concentrations on land as well as fixed targets.

Extremely high velocity rounds taking less and less time to target reduce the chance of missing by reducing the time available for aiming inaccuracy to multiply to a miss. But that means being on target the first time.
Anti-aircraft, maybe.
Yeah. I'm thinking flak kind of stuff. Rail shotguns are the only thing I can think of that might be made to disperse reliably.

Posted by gorb 2010-12-29 12:06|| 2010-12-29 12:06|| Front Page Top

#14 "Fear God and dread naught!"

Posted by borgboy 2010-12-29 13:39|| 2010-12-29 13:39|| Front Page Top

#15 "Or will everyone be building new versions of HMS Hood..."Christ, I hope not. The wreckage on the bottom of the Davis Straight ought to get that idea out of a lot of heads. Seriously I can see this going hand and hand with the Navy's continued interst in non-Tokamak style fusion reators

Posted by Cheaderhead 2010-12-29 13:54|| 2010-12-29 13:54|| Front Page Top

#16 None of this matters when all the computers on your ship stop working in the middle of combat due to a virus designed in at the factory. That's the future of armed conflict, not sci-fi superguns.

Posted by gromky 2010-12-29 15:56|| 2010-12-29 15:56|| Front Page Top

#17 None of this matters when all the computers on your ship stop working in the middle of combat due to a virus designed in at the factory. That's the future of armed conflict, not sci-fi superguns.

It is both, actually gromky. In fact, a jamming swarm of small robots coming at your ship and broadcasting to overwhelm the firewall and WIFI systems and insert their malicious code is also a very workable weapon. A sub coming under a ship and quietly planting a hub spike to do the same thing is also an option.

Blowing the hell out of something with a sci-fi gun and taking over computers are both in the future.

Posted by DarthVader 2010-12-29 16:33|| 2010-12-29 16:33|| Front Page Top

#18 a virus designed in at the factory

Which is not SF, gromky?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2010-12-29 16:56|| 2010-12-29 16:56|| Front Page Top

#19 Imagine a shotgun type load instead of a sabot. You wouldnteven need super exact aim just straddle the target. You might not kill the target but a single hit, even a smaller round, is gonna hurt.

And itmight look like some kind of meteor shower.

Posted by Rjschwarz 2010-12-29 22:54|| 2010-12-29 22:54|| Front Page Top

22:54 Rjschwarz
22:41 KBK
22:33 Frank G
22:26 Barbara Skolaut
22:08 trailing wife
20:31 Glenmore
20:24 twobyfour
20:12 NoMoreBS
20:07 twobyfour
19:58 tu3031
19:22 Swamp Blondie
18:46 Cyber Sarge
18:44 DarthVader
18:41 Anguper Hupomosing9418
18:36 Anguper Hupomosing9418
18:35 Frank G
18:08 Grunter
17:57 g(r)omgoru
17:56 trailing wife
17:53 trailing wife
17:42 Besoeker
17:34 gorb
17:31 gorb
17:28 Besoeker