Indian Scientists Successfully Fire Electromagnetic Railgun

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: DexterRiley

It's more the Pentagon in general.

They're talking about switching to Excaliber. It reduces the range to 30 miles, but the ammunition is about $70,000 a round. It would require a $250M modification to the Zumwalts.

Initially, wasn't one of the main design goals of the Zumwalt class destroyer to have the necessary electrical power systems to handle rail guns?

This is making my head hurt.


-dex

a reply to: DexterRiley

Yes, and they almost certainly do. The problem is the rail gun end of things. Excaliber will be an interim solution until they can be mounted.

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: dfnj2015

We should aim to systematise the plasma ignition as being centred around a small but electromagnetically dynamic particle which is delivered by miniaturised rail gun technology - a particle which has the ability conferred as an EM 'stamp' to generate plasma confinement fields/matrices based around the generation of virtual anode/ cathode shells (and for a bonus also retains kinetic damage potential). With the ignited ball of plasma supporting the work of the 'needle-like' entry made by our tiny electromagnetically dynamic particle screeching into whatever you're shooting at, THAT is when we have a true ray gun.

'Needle gun' has a catchy ring to it, come to think of it...

Nice explanation.


What hits the target then, burning plasma? Like Borg weapons?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: DexterRiley

Yes, and they almost certainly do. The problem is the rail gun end of things. Excaliber will be an interim solution until they can be mounted.

What happens to the ships then if there's a catastrophic power failure? They sitting ducks then?

a reply to: EA006

Their propulsion system is a pair of Rolls Royce gas turbine engines, which also generate 35 MW. There are two additional generators that provide almost 4 MW. The engine in question is based on the Trent 800 used on the Boeing 777, which has proven to be quite reliable.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EA006

Their propulsion system is a pair of Rolls Royce gas turbine engines, which also generate 35 MW. There are two additional generators that provide almost 4 MW. The engine in question is based on the Trent 800 used on the Boeing 777, which has proven to be quite reliable.

But it could still break down?

a reply to: EA006

Anything can break down.

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: dfnj2015

We should aim to systematise the plasma ignition as being centred around a small but electromagnetically dynamic particle which is delivered by miniaturised rail gun technology - a particle which has the ability conferred as an EM 'stamp' to generate plasma confinement fields/matrices based around the generation of virtual anode/ cathode shells (and for a bonus also retains kinetic damage potential). With the ignited ball of plasma supporting the work of the 'needle-like' entry made by our tiny electromagnetically dynamic particle screeching into whatever you're shooting at, THAT is when we have a true ray gun.

'Needle gun' has a catchy ring to it, come to think of it...

Nice explanation.

What hits the target then, burning plasma? Like Borg weapons?

Thanks! I considered it might be feasible based on the work of Dr Ronald Richter, in Argentina, in the decades following WW2. He was a Nazi scientist of dubious provenance, difficult to work with, reassigned multiple times by the Gestapo in the deep black world of Nazi scientific research during the war. He was allegedly transplanted to the Argentine regime of Peron, who permitted a Nazi ex-pat community to form in the Bariloche region. Richter was tasked by Peron with examining the possibility of creating a fusion project which could be used for energy production & weaponisation potential. Peron announced the 'success' of the project at a UN conference, prematurely - or likely, to the displeasure of the covert 'Nazi International' which had a large base of operations in his country. He was denounced as a fraud in the mainstream press, but was simultaneously investigated & 'headhunted' by covert research groups in the USA, even up to ten years after being denounced as a 'fraud'. He actually participated in the 'debunking' of his work by being ridiculously cack-handed in 'demonstrating' his project to the investigation committee which was established by Peron when he realised he didn't have the foggiest clue whether Richter was delivering the goods, or whether the denouncement was legitimate. His Nazi masters clearly ordered him to make himself look a fool & put on the faux-mantle of the fraudulent, greedy 'fake science' proponent that he was made out to be.

HOWEVER - if you read the work of Dr JP Farrell, you will find that in actual fact, the hidden Nazi-sponsored experimentation of Dr Ronald Richter, was actually DECADES ahead of its time, and some concepts only really came to be explored in the mainstream (non black-budget) science & academic community in very recent times. Some of the most similar projects of very recent years are actually INFERIOR to what Richter had set up in the 1950s...

From descriptions of the work of Richter, I derived the idea of virtual anode/cathode shells, which theoretically could constrain plasma, even in an ignited (or electrically active) state, and thus, if the 'particle' which had the 'imprinted EM properties' which gave rise to the virtual anode/cathode shells, were to be fired using either a rail gun (or coil gun, perhaps?), the electrically active/arcing/ignited plasma, being magnetically bonded to the central particle projectile, would travel as a streak of light to the target. Hence, actual ray gun. The needle-like entry hole into the target would deliver kinetic energy sufficient to cause significant damage to the human form, and in fact it would in some regards be an 'ethical' weapon, because it would instantly cauterise the whole interior path which it traversed through the flesh. The plasmic energy would have a traditional ignition effect if the shots were fired at combustible material, or into explosive areas of the target, would immediately impair the capacity of a combatant to persist in their war-fighting (by igniting their clothing, or burning them, or by causing electrical discharges from any equipment they were present with) - the plasmic ball of fire would also act as a convenient tracer means for the shooter (though exposing one's position simultaneously, so really it would be a single shot or mellee weapon, where it didn't matter if one was not being particularly covert). The speed of discharge & presumable rapid reload & fire capacity would be incredibly effective (dealing with, essentially, very small BBs which could be drop-fed into the chamber, or pumped/fed upwards mechanically as with most current weapons). It's perhaps also likely that a portable battery pack, worn on the webbing of the combatant, would be necessary to power this miniature rail/coil gun.

So yeah, the FITO-Needler Pistol™, available from your local DARPA outlets Spring 2018...!!

I'd like to see our wonderful government (UK) have military projects like this, instead of raping the military through cuts.

Oh look a resurgent Russia, a rapidly rising China and a # load more new threats around the globe. I know how we'll combat it, we'll reduce the size of the army, shrink the navy and get rid of the fleet capability to hit other ships (excluding subs), seriously consider get rid of our amphibious landing ships and get rid of 1000 marines! I can see Putin soiling his pants!!!

a reply to: maddy21

I would advocate scaling this tech down to replace a 20mm gatling gun. Make it mobile mounted, on either a fighter jet or humvee, and then talk about battle field performance.

originally posted by: tinymind
a reply to: maddy21

I would advocate scaling this tech down to replace a 20mm gatling gun. Make it mobile mounted, on either a fighter jet or humvee, and then talk about battle field performance.

Problem is make it smaller you decrease its impact,with lower velocity you get something we call a bullet. Without the speed you wont get theenergy which results in an explosion.

originally posted by: Therewearethen
I'd like to see our wonderful government (UK) have military projects like this, instead of raping the military through cuts.

Oh look a resurgent Russia, a rapidly rising China and a # load more new threats around the globe. I know how we'll combat it, we'll reduce the size of the army, shrink the navy and get rid of the fleet capability to hit other ships (excluding subs), seriously consider get rid of our amphibious landing ships and get rid of 1000 marines! I can see Putin soiling his pants!!!

He probably is since they and you don't know what British military capablilities are behind the scene.

Wonder how the invisible tanks are progressing lol

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: dfnj2015

We should aim to systematise the plasma ignition as being centred around a small but electromagnetically dynamic particle which is delivered by miniaturised rail gun technology - a particle which has the ability conferred as an EM 'stamp' to generate plasma confinement fields/matrices based around the generation of virtual anode/ cathode shells (and for a bonus also retains kinetic damage potential). With the ignited ball of plasma supporting the work of the 'needle-like' entry made by our tiny electromagnetically dynamic particle screeching into whatever you're shooting at, THAT is when we have a true ray gun.

'Needle gun' has a catchy ring to it, come to think of it...

Nice explanation.

What hits the target then, burning plasma? Like Borg weapons?

Thanks! I considered it might be feasible based on the work of Dr Ronald Richter, in Argentina, in the decades following WW2. He was a Nazi scientist of dubious provenance, difficult to work with, reassigned multiple times by the Gestapo in the deep black world of Nazi scientific research during the war. He was allegedly transplanted to the Argentine regime of Peron, who permitted a Nazi ex-pat community to form in the Bariloche region. Richter was tasked by Peron with examining the possibility of creating a fusion project which could be used for energy production & weaponisation potential. Peron announced the 'success' of the project at a UN conference, prematurely - or likely, to the displeasure of the covert 'Nazi International' which had a large base of operations in his country. He was denounced as a fraud in the mainstream press, but was simultaneously investigated & 'headhunted' by covert research groups in the USA, even up to ten years after being denounced as a 'fraud'. He actually participated in the 'debunking' of his work by being ridiculously cack-handed in 'demonstrating' his project to the investigation committee which was established by Peron when he realised he didn't have the foggiest clue whether Richter was delivering the goods, or whether the denouncement was legitimate. His Nazi masters clearly ordered him to make himself look a fool & put on the faux-mantle of the fraudulent, greedy 'fake science' proponent that he was made out to be.

HOWEVER - if you read the work of Dr JP Farrell, you will find that in actual fact, the hidden Nazi-sponsored experimentation of Dr Ronald Richter, was actually DECADES ahead of its time, and some concepts only really came to be explored in the mainstream (non black-budget) science & academic community in very recent times. Some of the most similar projects of very recent years are actually INFERIOR to what Richter had set up in the 1950s...

From descriptions of the work of Richter, I derived the idea of virtual anode/cathode shells, which theoretically could constrain plasma, even in an ignited (or electrically active) state, and thus, if the 'particle' which had the 'imprinted EM properties' which gave rise to the virtual anode/cathode shells, were to be fired using either a rail gun (or coil gun, perhaps?), the electrically active/arcing/ignited plasma, being magnetically bonded to the central particle projectile, would travel as a streak of light to the target. Hence, actual ray gun. The needle-like entry hole into the target would deliver kinetic energy sufficient to cause significant damage to the human form, and in fact it would in some regards be an 'ethical' weapon, because it would instantly cauterise the whole interior path which it traversed through the flesh. The plasmic energy would have a traditional ignition effect if the shots were fired at combustible material, or into explosive areas of the target, would immediately impair the capacity of a combatant to persist in their war-fighting (by igniting their clothing, or burning them, or by causing electrical discharges from any equipment they were present with) - the plasmic ball of fire would also act as a convenient tracer means for the shooter (though exposing one's position simultaneously, so really it would be a single shot or mellee weapon, where it didn't matter if one was not being particularly covert). The speed of discharge & presumable rapid reload & fire capacity would be incredibly effective (dealing with, essentially, very small BBs which could be drop-fed into the chamber, or pumped/fed upwards mechanically as with most current weapons). It's perhaps also likely that a portable battery pack, worn on the webbing of the combatant, would be necessary to power this miniature rail/coil gun.

So yeah, the FITO-Needler Pistol™, available from your local DARPA outlets Spring 2018...!!

What you selling them for?

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: tinymind
a reply to: maddy21

I would advocate scaling this tech down to replace a 20mm gatling gun. Make it mobile mounted, on either a fighter jet or humvee, and then talk about battle field performance.

Problem is make it smaller you decrease its impact,with lower velocity you get something we call a bullet. Without the speed you wont get theenergy which results in an explosion.

Yes, a bullet traveling at mach 5. The impact of a one kilo slug with a velocity of mach 5 would go a long way toward "knocking your d!ck into the dirt" . Of course it would not be used for shooting down ballistic targets, but on an open battle field it would keep the other sides heads way down. On a fighter jet, you woul gain a lot of savings in the weight of powder and brass.

a reply to: tinymind

And lose it all in the weight of capacitors and finding somewhere to mount the track and feed mechanism.

a reply to: EA006

Well considering Trump whizzed $59,000,000 in firecrackers which scorched the tarmac of an airfield which appears to have been populated with around three shacks (on the BBC there was classy footage of a bemused Syrian sweeping up a few bits of busted up material along an otherwise empty runway in an otherwise empty airfield!!) - in light of his willingness to throw good money after bad, I reckon I could ask a handsome $200,000 a piece..!!

a reply to: Zaphod58

Surely those are problems solved within a couple of years, given the pace of technological development?

T Townsend Brown seemed to know his schtick back in the fifties, so methinks there's probably some pretty heady stuff available now, except it's not used in the pesky little economic wars of terra firma.

Not to diminish the scale of human suffering imposed by the oligarchal 'plaything conflicts' - just that the real fight is probably not being discussed much, anywhere, by anyone, in any public forum.

And as you know, I'm a generalist with zero technical expertise. But pattern recognition is the key functional modus operandi of every brain on the planet, so overall trends can feed into reasonable speculation on the part of non-specialists..?

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

And yet, after something like 30 years of development the existing rail gun would still barely fit in a Zumwalt. Maybe in 20 years, but we're not seeing one that small for a long time.

originally posted by: EA006

originally posted by: Therewearethen
I'd like to see our wonderful government (UK) have military projects like this, instead of raping the military through cuts.

Oh look a resurgent Russia, a rapidly rising China and a # load more new threats around the globe. I know how we'll combat it, we'll reduce the size of the army, shrink the navy and get rid of the fleet capability to hit other ships (excluding subs), seriously consider get rid of our amphibious landing ships and get rid of 1000 marines! I can see Putin soiling his pants!!!

He probably is since they and you don't know what British military capablilities are behind the scene.

Wonder how the invisible tanks are progressing lol

It's obvious what the current British military capabilities are behind the scenes.

It's Theresa May frolicking through wheat fields.