It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Chinese Rail Gun Ship

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 03:56 AM
a reply to: pheonix358

" smart " projectiles have been tried in various conventional naval rifles , ground artilery anf motars - they have all proved to be astronomically expensive

posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 06:36 AM

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Allaroundyou

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Blackfinger

How does it "appear to be a railgun?"

Because it resembles a rail gun?

You ask the oddest questions.

CNBC Linky

To the OP.. it would be interesting if they have somehow worked out the kinks.

Maybe for a change we could steal China's tech.

Rail guns aren't as super advanced as everyone makes them out to be. Iv's played with one on a much smaller scale that was built by a 19yo. I think he got a job at Northrop Grumman a few years ago. Smart ass kid was always building random crap.

The technology is old... I read about it from a book in the 1960's.

Played around with it in the 80's.

It's scaling it up to the point that it could be a game-changer in an intercontinental war is the difference.

It's like the Rod of God... simple concept, but actually applying it is a lot harder than it looks.

Did you know our military once developed an atomic bomb rifle?

The only problem with it was that the operator couldn't clear the blast zone...

Did not know that about the rifle.

They should have kept it and just renamed it the suicide bomb gun and have a label " non operators should stay back 25,000 feet ". AND when we need even more blast zone than that, well just tough!

Remember, if you can cover the blast site from your eyes with your thumb then you are TOO close! A FEMA training session I once attended pointed that out for us. They were a mile away from a propane tank on a train blowing to hell and debris landed on them.
edit on 1-1-2019 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 06:43 AM

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: ignorant_ape

Very well could be, All military's are know to lie and deceive. Like the blow-up doll tanks, that was a good one.

Or the Greek's gift to the Trojans off a beautiful giant wooden horse.

posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 06:44 AM
Look at that, they are finally learning how to teleport their ships...
Took them long enough...
That’s not a rail gun...
edit on 1-1-2019 by 5StarOracle because: Word

posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 06:52 AM
Not much good a rail gun on a ship can do when you drop a bomb or fire a missile at the ship
then the ship sinks along with the rail gun that China had invested all that money on.

Maybe more practical as a coastal defense weapon than mounted on something sinkable at sea?

posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 09:50 AM
a reply to: SpaghettiHero

by that " logic - done put ANYTNING on a marine platform - cos it could be sunk

posted on Jan, 1 2019 @ 05:01 PM

originally posted by: SpaghettiHero
Not much good a rail gun on a ship can do when you drop a bomb or fire a missile at the ship
then the ship sinks along with the rail gun that China had invested all that money on.

Maybe more practical as a coastal defense weapon than mounted on something sinkable at sea?

Umm...rail gun could splash the airplane before it gets in range to launch. How? Aircraft warning sytem prolly won't pick up the projectile.

posted on Jan, 2 2019 @ 09:02 AM
a reply to: Blackfinger

Hold on a moment there were very reliable rumors that the US had an old (and very big it apparently took up the entire length of the vessel, limited as the entire ship had to be turned to fire it) converted navy destroyer testing a ship sized Railgun as far back as the mid or late 80's so if that is the case then China has most certainly, most definitely not beaten anyone to deploying a rail gun, I mean what the hell do you think all those DUMBs are for elite bold hole's, nah they are massive SDI defense facility's or at least many of them are.
This is what a railgun projectile fired from the surface of the earth at an unknown object look's like.

Back in the 80's Reagan then president of the US and the most powerful man in the world said this to the UN.

He Also initiated the strategic defence initiative SDI also know as the Star Wars Defense initiative.
This does not mention the rail gun development but it was definitely a part of the program.

And forget the idiot's that claim it is ice crystal's changing direction due to vectored thrust generated by solar heating of ice particles because in this case it most certainly is not, it is a very fast linear unguided projectile fired at immense velocity's at an unknown object potentially a genuine UFO.

I bet the chinese version is just rip off made in china crap compared as well no offence, probably break after a few goes if it work's at all or worse.

edit on 2-1-2019 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 2 2019 @ 10:44 AM
a reply to: LABTECH767

a rail gun " teh lehgth of a destroyer " , that " requires turning the vessel to aim "

sounds like utter bollox

blisteringly obvious question # 1 :

how do you elevate the barrel ??

there may have been an insanly long prototype built " somewhere "

but not mounted the full length of a ship

posted on Jan, 2 2019 @ 11:26 AM
a reply to: ignorant_ape

You really don't know much about ship's or railgun's do you mate.
A ship can be tilted by moving ballast and as this was only a test bed not a weapon system intended for active deployment that question is equally daft.
Also you aim a static rail gun using magnetic vectoring in the final stage of the acceleration track such as those in vast underground facility's which are far larger than the ship born type and can in theory at least accelerate there small but dense projectile to a far greater speed (while some are are also potentially - I say potentially magnetic acceleration deployment system's for satellite and alternative to rocket engine method's or ICBM deployment - more stealthy as well since they do not need to use there engines until they are in orbital insertion position or to change there location etc once in orbit - as they also do not need to launch with huge bulky rocket motor's which as you know are then abandoned in stages until the payload is at it's final altitude - also there is the possibility that they can use them to launch stealth composite shrouded payload's?.

The small rail gun you may have seen tested is year's if not more likely decades behind what they already have but is far smaller so is really just the public disclosure of small rail gun development, these type WILL be suitable for ordinary ship mounting and even using an auto stabilization method they can then be accurately aimed just like we do with our Tank's in our country, of course the yank's could if they wanted to bite the bullet and use better equipment always buy that off us - they already have the right to use our tech under our tech sharing agreement's after all and we remember did and still do a lot of there research and development for them, heck even when I was a kid when the space shuttle had only just launched someone I knew back then whose father worked in Pilkington Laboratories up here in Lancashire showed me a FAILED - due to flaw's test tile from the development period before the yank's actually flew those thing's so we were in on there development as well.

posted on Jan, 2 2019 @ 12:00 PM
a reply to: LABTECH767

clearly - far more than you

but ok - EXACTLY how far can you trim a vessel by selective flooding // ballast

lets assume a 80m OAL and 5 m freeboard

as for " magnetic vectoring " - fook off you imbecile

and the rest of your post - just devolves to cretinous dribblings

posted on Jan, 2 2019 @ 06:23 PM
a reply to: ignorant_ape

What a foul attitude, you did not even bother to lay a keel for your argument and have shown that you can't lose an argument with grace.
Sad very Sad and I actually feel rather embarrassed for you.

posted on Jan, 2 2019 @ 11:08 PM
a reply to: LABTECH767

run away = brave sir robbin

posted on Jan, 3 2019 @ 11:02 AM
a reply to: ignorant_ape

Oooh you would never fine me running away, have had knives, syringes and worse pulled on me back in my security day's.

I could tell you some story's that would probably make you chuckle not all shop lifters are the brightest bunch but there was this one guy whom worked in a team, one leg lost above the knee and half an arm so he would always ask for help to distract while his chum's did a runner - a trolley push as we call it here.

The syringes were the thing that scared me I would rather be knifed, I chased one idiot that tried to knife me (I lost my temper and may have threatened to stick that knife were the sun did not shine but I left that bit out) and he only got away because he ran over a railway line while there was an oncoming train and hopped into some back gardens on the other side of the track's (£1000 fine for trespassing on the railway track but I doubt they ever prosecute then again when I got him in court that never even came up), I lost the stock he had because he was a typical smack head like a block of greasy soap but got a prosecution from CCTV footage which I promptly burned to CD and made a detailed incident report to go with it, could and should have lost my job as we are NOT insured to go chasing after crook's but it's one of those thing's if you let every thief go then what good are you so you have to do the best you can in that game of cat and mouse.

Got stick of the local bobbies for week's though as they loved the chase footage and thought it was hilarious with my fat belly slapping my double chin as I gave chase to this skinny thief, and his defense tried to make out the Stanley knife he tried to slash me with was a mobile phone.

My problem was that I still see these people as human being's and still at least at a human level care about them but could never let that get in the way of my job.

Oh as to ship's, the British Navy and the Army as well they are both family tradition's, when the first gulf war was just about to kick off I was straight down to the recruitment center, in the end I did not go in because the first gulf war was hyped by the media and Iraq folded like a paper lion with all those millions of supposed soldiers turning out to be bare footed impoverished and illiterate men, I knew a guy whom did field analysis for the MOD as well whom told me some story's about how they did some field testing on some of those retreating Iraqi vehicles, one was basically of a hole punch like missile which would penetrate the mild steel hull's of those export quality Iraqi T72's and T80's, it had a small amount of liquid mercury around an explosive charge and the idea was that this high velocity mercury would kill the occupant's while leaving the tank more or less intact, change a few dial's and a few soft component's and your good to go, he had to literally hose what was left of the Iraqi crew out of the vehicle and write up a field report on the effectiveness of this weapon at depopulating an enemy vehicle.
It was an old type of device but one that they really wanted to test against soviet type hardware so you can understand why they would take the opportunity to field test it.

edit on 3-1-2019 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 3 2019 @ 01:45 PM
a reply to: LABTECH767

thats nice dear - now instead of waffling utter inanities please answer the questions :

your entire post = off topic deflection

explain using pitch as a means of gun training

explain " magnetic deflection "

posted on Jan, 3 2019 @ 03:31 PM
a reply to: ignorant_ape

Oh dear little boy why did you now say that in the first place instead of resorting to immature and nasty swear word's like an illiterate person.

Vectoring as you know is all about direction when talking about a projectile or an Aeroplane (Sorry that's the older and actually correct spelling it's a French word and they invented though some time in the teen's of the last century it became standardized in English speaking nations to the Americanization of Air Plane).

So how do you change the vector of an object moving at extreme speed when you can not use a physical barrel to do so as in the case of a huge rail gun the air has been removed and once it reaches a significant speed the barrel is removed and a set of magnetic ring's are used to accelerate the projectile at ever increasing velocity's.

Well you do it to make it rather coarse and easy for you to understand in a way that is very similar to how they do it in a particle accelerator or an even easier analogy how they were able to control the direction of electron's streaming from the electron gun's in an old cathode ray tube.

Now this is a vast over simplification but I have to simplify it for you now don't I, there are two ways' of doing this, one is for the final stages of the acceleration track (there is no actual track it is just called that though there is an electromagnetic assisted lift system) of the rail gun, this can be done by using yet more magnet's, these very powerful high speed electromagnets can then BEND the path of the projectile in it's final stage and precisely target it onto it's assigned flight path.

Now let's just clear some thing's up for you about ballast, most ship's are displacement hulled vessel's and what this mean's is that they move THROUGH the water, now ballast is essential to control the trim of a vessel especially in modern container ships so that asymmetric load displacements can be compensated for and regulated by moving that ballast around and also for when the ship has no cargo which in most cases with displacement hull container ship's would mean that the vessel would then ride too high in the water and lose some measure of stability giving it a tendency to roll across it's beam so to compensate the cock's are opened and the sea water is pumped into the ballast tank's so making the vessel more stable in the water.

In the case of most modern warship's however there hull's are a hybrid between a displacement and a planing hull.

What is a planing hull, well the first military vessels to use it in modern time's were actually small RAF - not Royal Navy - speed boats designed to save downed pilot's as the cold waters around the English coast make time an essential factor in getting a pilot out of the water as fast as possible and a certain very famous guy you may better know as Lawrence of Arabia was very instrumental in there adoption but the knowledge of them goes much further back in time.

The oldest SEMI planing hull we know of is that of the old viking long ship's, it worked like this a planing hull rides OVER the water and in the case of the long ship's they were made with overlapping plant's, the upper plank over lapped the lower plank and this in turn created channels along which as the hull moved through the water as it picked up speed air became trapped along these grooves and this in turn reduced friction upon the hull allowing the viking ship's to move much faster than they would have been able to do if they had not had that overlapping plank design.

Since the test rail gun was fitted along the length of the destroyers hull to alter the elevation all they had to do was shift ballast for to aft and aft to for and to alter the ship's pitch as you call it that would have been by adjusting ballast across the beam of the ship, of course it was NOT a weapon just a development stage prototype that was RUMORED to have existed, I even knew the name of the ship but it eludes me these day's as I only read about it, the story as best I can relay it was this and it was very scant on technical detail's, back in the 80's the US navy apparently took one of it's older destroyers, a large ship and used it for testing and in this case it was fitted with a prototype rail gun testing rig that ran the length of almost the entire hull, it was not a deploy-able weapon but development prototype so this was just to prove the concept or a mobile ship mounted rail gun based weapon system and was apparently a failure but proved that it was at least possible so the US then can onside with the we Brits in developing better modern rail gun's, this was fairly early day's but as you MAY or may not know the whole rail gun concept is actually a very old one.

Early experiments in rail gun's were less than impressive and are based on the mid 19th century invention of the Coil Gun an early electromagnetic weapon that was too far ahead of the technology of it's time to ever have been developed that early.
The first what we might call a rail gun was created by a french guy at the start of the 20th century.

But these day's even India is in on the game having developed there own and it is promising as well if likely very far behind what we have here and likely with the help of Indian scientists that probably worked on our own project's or knew some guy('s) that did or perhaps we leaked it to them to keep the region stable by giving a counterbalance to China.

(by the way I know you are just as clever but you started it with the foul language so you know you asked for it).

edit on 3-1-2019 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in