I was wondering if the infantry will use personal railguns in the future. Of course in order to develop compact EM rifle especially power source improvents are needed.
1. So my questions how much power is needed to give normal 9mm projectile speed of 1000m/s?
2. Could the power input (muzzle velocity) be regulated? I mean future soldier would be able to simply press a key and set high muzzle velocity for sniping or low for house combat (or silent shooting - I think if the velocity is under speed of sound the shot is absolutely silent because there is no blast t????)

Good questions. THe only thing that I can add is that Room teperature superconductors are necessary or a revolution in a small size portable power sources to make these weapons work?

it wlil be a couple years at least unless a major break through occurs. What we will see is a chemically propelled round, accelerated by a railgun. the problem with using a railgun as an infantry weapon, is that it would be fragile (both internally, railguns have a tendency to buckle under the stress they are put under, or the rails fuse; as well as externally, it's a little more delicate than a metal tube)

What i would be on the lookout for, other than the naval railguns coming soon, is Humvee mounted railguns.

If you are interested in the development, they are building a testing facility for railgun tech in the states.

The internet has plenty of info if you need anything more.

hmm well 1000m/s thats REALLY fast. it takes alot of power to fire a rail gun , you need atleast about a kilovoltto work it but most railguns can do 4km/s in 6 metres now thinking on that i think its like 1.5 metres for every 1 km/s. now even 1km/s can literally shoot your arm off and be a kilometre away before you cry out in pain.

Originally posted by devilwasp
hmm well 1000m/s thats REALLY fast. it takes alot of power to fire a rail gun , you need atleast about a kilovoltto work it but most railguns can do 4km/s in 6 metres now thinking on that i think its like 1.5 metres for every 1 km/s. now even 1km/s can literally shoot your arm off and be a kilometre away before you cry out in pain.

Why do you think? AK-47 fires the 7.62 mm at 870m/s(I think) . So why should a railgun firing 9mm (or 7.62) 1000m/s rip my arm off? Also Barret M-82 0.50 fires it's 12.7 projectile also at high speeds (+/-900m/s I think),

The M16A2 has a muzzle velocity of 3,100 fps. I think that translates to about 1,000 mps. I'm no ballistics expert, but I know the 120mm gun on the M1 Abrams fires fin-stabilized SABOT rounds with a muzzle velocity of about Mach 4. You have to shoot something incredibly fast to stabilize it without rifled barrel. Also rail gun would need battery power just to load, unless it's breech action. In M16 that's accomplished by gas.

Probably first railgun used by troops will be akin to Beretta sniper rifle, something huge and deadly but not for line troops.

Originally posted by longbow


Why do you think? AK-47 fires the 7.62 mm at 870m/s(I think) . So why should a railgun firing 9mm (or 7.62) 1000m/s rip my arm off? Also Barret M-82 0.50 fires it's 12.7 projectile also at high speeds (+/-900m/s I think),

yeah those projectiles are smaller. so they go faster.
by the way im talking about a small ring object not a bullet. less chance of a short circuit. also a sniper rifle hitting your arm would practicallt rip it apart esspecially from a barret .50 cal. now you cant say a 9mm projectile hitting you at 1km/s is not going to cause serios damage. i mean imagine the exit hole.
why would u want it to just go at 1km/s anyway?

Also I mean all the force going out the barrel is connected to the shoulder of the rifleman. So once you hit a certain caliber / velocity you need some recoilless mechanism.

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Also I mean all the force going out the barrel is connected to the shoulder of the rifleman. So once you hit a certain caliber / velocity you need some recoilless mechanism.

hmm yeah. i thought about that for a while ,mabye some sort of support mechanism?

Uhhh 1000m/s second isn't fast at all

The Steyr ACR fired it's rounds at 1450m/s, with just normal chemical propellent.

You'd be looking at 4 km/s with a railgun

Originally posted by devilwasp

yeah those projectiles are smaller. so they go faster.
by the way im talking about a small ring object not a bullet. less chance of a short circuit. also a sniper rifle hitting your arm would practicallt rip it apart esspecially from a barret .50 cal. now you cant say a 9mm projectile hitting you at 1km/s is not going to cause serios damage. i mean imagine the exit hole.
why would u want it to just go at 1km/s anyway?

1km/s is maximum.
For example most combat ranges in Iraq are less than 100m. So the EM rifle battery will have let's say 400-500 m/s as default option (lower voltage) . It would save energy and it is enough to kill enemy 100-150 m away. If you want to fire at longer distances or shoot through the walls you just press a key and you are the sniper - the rifle is set up for 1000 m/s (very high voltage). If you want to be silent you will set the rifle so it fires at subsonic speed (350 m/s???) and you have H&K MP5. Don't you think it would be nice to have this all in just one single weapon?
Of course there is need for very compact power source. I was asking about the necessary power input, because I want know how long it will take until sufficient power source is developed.


[edit on 6-9-2004 by longbow]

Originally posted by Kozzy
Uhhh 1000m/s second isn't fast at all

The Steyr ACR fired it's rounds at 1450m/s, with just normal chemical propellent.

You'd be looking at 4 km/s with a railgun

Yes, but ACR was using very small and light ammo. I want to use higher caliber - 7.62 or 9mm to be deadly also in silent (subsonic) mode.

[edit on 6-9-2004 by longbow]

until someone gives me a credible answer to the question :

" what power source can efficiently replace the bang per buck / kilo and convenience of a box of loose ammo and link belts gives a platoon in the feild "

i see no future for any electric power weapon


cased ammo brass is cheap enoug to be discarded in the feild

how will you police / recover / recharge expensive power cells ? more support troops ? infantry are supposed to fight not lug supplies up to the line


YRS - APE

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
until someone gives me a credible answer to the question :

" what power source can efficiently replace the bang per buck / kilo and convenience of a box of loose ammo and link belts gives a platoon in the feild "

i see no future for any electric power weapon


cased ammo brass is cheap enoug to be discarded in the feild

how will you police / recover / recharge expensive power cells ? more support troops ? infantry are supposed to fight not lug supplies up to the line


YRS - APE

Dude isn't it obvious? Every soldier wears an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. Just don't cross the streams until you need the FPF.

Originally posted by taibunsuu


Dude isn't it obvious? Every soldier wears an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. Just don't cross the streams until you need the FPF.

uhh what happens when it gets hit or shot or damaged?
a pretty mushroom cloud ? or just some fizzing and you skin falling off.

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
until someone gives me a credible answer to the question :

" what power source can efficiently replace the bang per buck / kilo and convenience of a box of loose ammo and link belts gives a platoon in the feild "

i see no future for any electric power weapon


cased ammo brass is cheap enoug to be discarded in the feild

how will you police / recover / recharge expensive power cells ? more support troops ? infantry are supposed to fight not lug supplies up to the line


YRS - APE

uhh what about navy ? space? would make cannons obsolete.
also they could use fusion if they get it working.

Originally posted by longbow

Originally posted by Kozzy
Uhhh 1000m/s second isn't fast at all

The Steyr ACR fired it's rounds at 1450m/s, with just normal chemical propellent.

You'd be looking at 4 km/s with a railgun

Yes, but ACR was using very small and light ammo. I want to use higher caliber - 7.62 or 9mm to be deadly also in silent (subsonic) mode.

[edit on 6-9-2004 by longbow]

You don't need such a high caliber round at that speeds, just design a round that gets the maximum expansion at that speed, which isn't hard.

I think 5.56mm SLAP ammo gets 1km/s

reading this ive got that arnie film eraser in my head. if they can get these weapons down to that size its going to be a dangerous battlefield.

one of those xray sight things would be nice aswell but a long long way down the line

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by taibunsuu


Dude isn't it obvious? Every soldier wears an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. Just don't cross the streams until you need the FPF.

uhh what happens when it gets hit or shot or damaged?
a pretty mushroom cloud ? or just some fizzing and you skin falling off.

Someone here has to re-watch Ghostbusters.