USN getting ready for field test of railgun
- Thread starter phavoc
- Start date
I get that there are far more expensive rounds. To put it in perspective a 155mm NATO standard round costs about $500. An MLRS six-pack (standard bomblets) costs about $110,000.
I've found references to the shell costing $500 (16"), but I'm assuming that it's some other year's dollars.
Cheap, of course, is relative.
I've found references to the shell costing $500 (16"), but I'm assuming that it's some other year's dollars.
Cheap, of course, is relative.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Depends on the total cost of the alternatives, social, economic, political, diplomatic, manning, logistics; you get the idea.
That's why an unmanned drone firing a very expensive, low explosive but very accurate smart missile might actually cost less than saturating the entire area with a squadron of Bee fifty-twos.
That's why an unmanned drone firing a very expensive, low explosive but very accurate smart missile might actually cost less than saturating the entire area with a squadron of Bee fifty-twos.
Bear in mind that price is probably based on very limited production runs. If the number of deployed weapons increases and ammunition consumption rates rise, costs per unit will fall. Right now, the manufacturers don't know if this weapon will be a success or get canned in a few months or a year, and will be pricing ammunition accordingly.
Simon Hibbs
Simon Hibbs
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
A 45 pound shell compared to a single missile weighing in at a range of 1000-3000 pound able to travel at a velocity of 5600 miles an hour with guidance to carry it a hundred miles over the horizon with the ability to track and intercept cruise missiles as well as larger targets. At those speed, must be damn well hard to intercept. It has potential.
I take it this is a form of either the gauss or hypervelocity cannons in the Vehicle Handbook but at much lower TL and much larger.
I take it this is a form of either the gauss or hypervelocity cannons in the Vehicle Handbook but at much lower TL and much larger.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
We're talking very long range, and probably midflight correction.
No ship is going to survive near shore to provide gun support, if the other side has enough missiles. But it's going to take immense amounts of power, which is why they've started building warships with huge generators, and will probably create a variant for point defense.
No ship is going to survive near shore to provide gun support, if the other side has enough missiles. But it's going to take immense amounts of power, which is why they've started building warships with huge generators, and will probably create a variant for point defense.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
The other reason, besides more powerful sensors and radars, is if they manage to perfect a viable laser weapons system.
There was a proposal to build LHDs with nuclear power plants, but below that tonnage, it seems unlikely for surface ships.
There was a proposal to build LHDs with nuclear power plants, but below that tonnage, it seems unlikely for surface ships.
Condottiere said:
Any ship that is part of a carrier group should be nuke. Otherwise they slow down the carrier tremendously. It is simply politics that keeps ships running on petrol chemicals.
Why wouldn't you want to stick a 5' diameter 30 MW reactor into an Arleigh Burke that currently uses 3 huge diesels to produce only 7.5 MW? The sapce saved from no oil needed could be used for food and other items to extend endurance.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
As I like pointing out, I'm not an engineer, but I think the Americans want to avoid the mess the Russians have made of their disposal of nuclear power plants, so only embed them in their strategic assets.
The submarines need a source of long term power, and the Fords are expected to serve a century.
They could have nuked the Zumwalts, but perhaps cost considerations (above those that actually occurred), nuked that idea.
The submarines need a source of long term power, and the Fords are expected to serve a century.
They could have nuked the Zumwalts, but perhaps cost considerations (above those that actually occurred), nuked that idea.
Tom Kalbfus
Mongoose
I don't cost nearly that much!dragoner said:
Tom Kalbfus
Mongoose
Be sure that when your ordering a rail gun, they don't send you this!