It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Railguns & gravity weapons in space - an effective anti-missile shield?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 12:06 AM
link   
So listening to the recent talk about "space force" where they plan to nuclearize space for potential asteroid divergence and or destruction and such and the TV show Salvation where there is an asteroid heading towards earth and they plan on diverting it. In Salvation they show nuclear ICBM's being intercepted by ground launched missiles and it seems the plan is to build a large rail gun to divert the asteroid.

On a side note, I remember a quote which I think was attributed to Werner Von Braun in which he outlined the Reich's plan (actually globalist's plan's which they may have been fighting...?) in how to obtain total global governance dominance - a One World Order I guess. It started with dividing between Communism & Capitalism and the "winner" would move on - basically the Cold war was totally planned to see which was a superior form of economy & governance. Then there would be terrorism and environmental threats introduced in which there would be a call for global laws and action on a global level. Then there would be the threat of Asteroids and possibly Aliens, IDK if they are supposed to be at the same time, or staggered but with the veiled "disclosure" of (was it just last year?? seems longer ago..) UFO's or whatever (didn't follow it) and now the "Asteroid day" and "space force" it seems that the progression is moving along as planned 70+ years ago. It may have been some other German scientist but I think it was their "rocket man" who said it...

I've been following railgun development for almost 20 years and at they are actually relatively simple (principle wise) and with modern materials and manufacturing along with battery and other energy storage mechanisms (especially in space - something like a flywheel could store tremendous amounts of energy & provide a mechanism for aiming the weapon via gyroscopic forces).

The thing about a railgun is that they are limited on earth due to the relatively dense atmosphere compared to vacuum of space which really slows the projectile & reduces the maximum initial velocity. In space these would be an amazing way to target ICBM's possibly up to 1/2 way around the world from one location. Positioning them on the equator (in orbit) would give a broad coverage (probably entire planet) with a 4 positioned guns.

The problem with these guns is they require a tremendous amount of energy (electricity) to fire but this may be greatly reduced working in the vacuum of space) which would allow for a smaller power supply and or for faster firing (both speed and shots per minute) with the same size power supply. I would think that a small nuclear reactor may be necessary to obtain enough power fast enough to fire many volley's in a short time, unless an energy accumulator (like flywheels) could be used to store energy from solar power over long periods as they don't need to be fired very often, so once charged, they just maintain accumulated energy.

The orbiting railguns could also be used to destroy satellites of enemies in very short periods of time and could probably be used as a kinetic weapon with power similar to the MOAB but with continuous and instantaneous (basically) global coverage.

Then there is the option of other kinetic energy gravity weapons which are basically something like a tungsten rod (nail, bullet or missile shaped) which are dropped from orbiting satellites ("Gods's rod pods???"
) which depending on mass could have similar energy of a nuclear bomb w/o radiation and nuclear fallout. These could also be used to destroy DEEP bunkers (100's to maybe 1,000+ ft if designed for that application). I would think a bunker penetration could be augmented with a rocket booster which could fire (possibly once in atmosphere) for even higher speed and penetration. It's possible they may even be able to be armed with nuclear war heads for detonation underground. From what I've read, all of these tech's have been developed in separate technologies and I can't see why they wouldn't marry them together for a totally amazing weapon (except for the ethical side of it, that is...). I would also have the rail guns either on these "rod pods" for defense of the pod and they could also be used for the ICBM interception.

As far as putting all this in space, from what I have looked at about modern rockets and their lift capacity there is currently plenty of capacity to place these possibly with a number of launches to build a complete system & additional "reloads" and or fuel.

What I am really curious about is what would happen if a railgun round was fired perpendicular to the atmosphere if it would be destroyed or have problems entering the atmosphere (which I think may not be an issue because the atmosphere slowly builds density and isn't a thick/dense outer layer through which things must pass (at least if you believe what we are taught about the outer atmosphere).

What do you people think about the ethics of this and if either of these would be effective weapons, either as deterrents or for defensive/offensive weapons - especially against ICBM's and satellite destruction (which would be insanely beneficial if a major war broke out against another space capable country like Russia, China, India, and others who rely on satellites for com's and positioning).




posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Nope. Railguns and gravity weapons are good at destroying large objects but not missles. Railgun are basically advance versions of cannons. You cannot shoot missiles down with cannons. Why would you drop gravity weapons on missiles if it is already in the air. Gravity weapons are meant to bomb targets like missiles used to hit targets on ground. They don't fly unless. If they do, then they are missiles. There s already a system in place to counter missiles. Its laser and auto-cannons.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof




On a side note, I remember a quote which I think was attributed to Werner Von Braun in which he outlined the Reich's plan

You are remembering a claim from Carol Rosin about what Von Braun said.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: makemap


You cannot shoot missiles down with cannons.

Yeah, you can:


The issue right now is rapid-fire magazine-fed railguns that can do what a CIWS can do against some missiles.

I agree with you otherwise, however. When it comes to ICBM class missiles, particularly MIRV'ed systems, however, laser are where it's at.

Right now the Pentagon wants MW class lasers for those purposes and others:

US Defense pushing for megawatt class lasers


“We need to have 100-kilowatt-class weapons on Army theater vehicles. We need to have 300-kilowatt-class weapons on Air Force tankers,” Griffin said. “We need to have megawatt-class directed energy weapons in space for space defense. These are things we can do over the next decade if we can maintain our focus.”



edit on 26 6 18 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DigginFoTroof




On a side note, I remember a quote which I think was attributed to Werner Von Braun in which he outlined the Reich's plan

You are remembering a claim from Carol Rosin about what Von Braun said.


IDK about that, I read that about 8 years ago so IDK where it originated from and didn't find the quote. Did she attribute this to him some time ago, or was this a "recent" (like last 10-15 years) disclosure from her?



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I think it was first in Greer's first "disclosure" thingy, from her. But I don't pay much attention to him or her.


edit on 6/26/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:13 AM
link   
All the systems your talking about like the Phalanx / Aegis system, are meant for cruise missiles and anti-ship missiles, not ICBM's.

What I'm talking about is a platform that hits the ICBM while it is either in space or upper atmosphere, where no cannon can reach it. Now that is done with ground fired missiles (which are basically similar to the ICBM's themselves). Using a space platform railgun would totally work to destroy any ICBM it hits, especially if it is before atmospheric re-entry. The ICBM would burn up and disintegrate upon re-entry after being hit by a railgun projectile.

and to "Makemap" you don't understand the tech.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I think it was first in Greer's first "disclosure" thingy, from her. But I don't pay much attention to him or her.



Well regardless of who reported it, did Von Braun actually make that claim?

On another note, do you believe that what was reportedly said is accurate and that there is a progression of "threats" that have been planned out in order to install a global government or some other reason?



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Next you'll saying disco was a good thing.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Yeah didn't work for the planet Reach on "Halo-the fall of Reach" but were pretty devastating nonetheless....



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I think it was first in Greer's first "disclosure" thingy, from her. But I don't pay much attention to him or her.



Well regardless of who reported it, did Von Braun actually make that claim?

On another note, do you believe that what was reportedly said is accurate and that there is a progression of "threats" that have been planned out in order to install a global government or some other reason?
Just the white haired wonder Rosin ever came forward with the info and I doubt WVB would have only disclosed this info to her. As far as rods from god versus rail gun vs energy weapon systems they each have their own part to play no one is a kill all weapons system, they each have their merets for certain regimes but non is a master of all. A purely gravity driven anti ICBM system would be found seriously wanting and combining rods from god and nuclear payloads make the former a bit of moot point.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

All weapons created by the government will one day be used on the people.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 07:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Osirisvset
Yeah didn't work for the planet Reach on "Halo-the fall of Reach" but were pretty devastating nonetheless....
...because the Brutes were invited to planetside and immediately began killing everything.

Not to mention Covi tech was far more advanced then what Humans had.

-Offtopic-

But, Orbital defense MAC platforms do sound soooo very sexy.

Like the Zues Cannom from "FF Spirits Within".



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 07:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

All weapons created by the government will one day be used on the people.
*facepalm* as would any invention my any person.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

All weapons created by the government will one day be used on the people.
*facepalm* as would any invention my any person.

Before or after China steals them?



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 02:10 PM
link   
I would think that missiles and lasers would be most effective space based (non-gravity) weapons. Railguns, when fired, would push the satellite/station in the opposite direction messing up its orbit and aim for the next shot, especially if it were a rapid fire weapon.

As for gravity weapons, they would be effective against ground target, but not ICBMs or other moving targets.



posted on Jun, 26 2018 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: BomSquad
I would think that missiles and lasers would be most effective space based (non-gravity) weapons. Railguns, when fired, would push the satellite/station in the opposite direction messing up its orbit and aim for the next shot, especially if it were a rapid fire weapon.

As for gravity weapons, they would be effective against ground target, but not ICBMs or other moving targets.

The tungsten rods are designed to be able to double as a bunker buster very effectively and ICBM silos would be a juicy stationary target, it’s the mobile and sublaunched ballistic missiles are much more of a worry IMHO. I hadn’t even thought about the rail gun disrupting it’s orbit OTOH a space based railgun would be much lower powered as it would have to be to be put in orbit and it would not have to fight the atmosphere and would get a speed boost from gravity. Also if you wanted to have a very big power rail gun you could link two of the satelites back to back and have them both fire at the same instant thus creating a zero net “recoil”.



posted on Jul, 24 2018 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Remember that space clip that aired during the 90s of what looked like a lazer being shot from earth.

A lazer shot at an object which reversed its course



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join