More Shit-Tier Weapons Journalism

File: 1456331962404.png (1MB, 852x854px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 852x854px

>>30103262
>25 megawatts—enough electricity to power 18,750 homes
>Powering 18,750 homes - for what, a day each? An hour?
are you just being retarded on purpose or do you really have no clue what the unit Watts actually describes?

>>30103262

>Development of the railgun guidance system is about done
>of the railgun guidance system is about
>railgun guidance system
>guidance
>not projectile

nigger

>>30103442
School's out, huh?

>>30103573
you call that a comeback?

>>30103538
They aren't dumb munitions anon, it's a rail gun firing what amounts to hardened self correcting cruise missiles that can't be shot down by conventional missile defense systems. GG with a chink copy of aegis when the projectile is a tungsten rod operating off pure ungodly KE to tear whatever it hits a new asshole.

>>30103695
>conflating rockets and solid projectiles
That "tungsten rod" of yours won't have course-correction, dumbass.

File: 1406471785380.jpg (102KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1024x683px

>>30103262
>25 megawatts—enough electricity to power 18,750 homes.'
>Powering 18,750 homes - for what, a day each? An hour?

What is this I don't even.
I bet you thought you was being real smart when you typed this out.

File: 1356321976573.jpg (76KB, 680x471px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 680x471px

>>30103719
They literally plan to hit ballistic missiles in the terminal stage with it.

>>30103719
>Thinking rail guns will fire unguided rounds
How the fuck else do you think they're effective out to 100+ miles? It'll have ailerons m8, controlled by a hardened guidance system.

Missile defense systems for the most part operate by taking out the engine or detonating the payload of a missile. You can't do either against a kinetic energy weapon. Fuck the guidance system with a close in defense measure and your ticket to hell is still bearing down on you.

>>30103769
>guidance
>at 4500 mph
You're an idiot.

>>30103798
Let me add to that:
>guidance capable of delivering a precision strike on ballistic missiles, when not even said ballistic missiles have active guidance at the speeds involved

File: schoolbully-shutterstock.jpg (34KB, 615x345px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 615x345px

>>30103586
Yur mom wants my cum back. Now give me your lunch money or else homo!

>>30103734
I would respond, but you're being rude. This isn't a flame board for children.

>>30103820
Don't worry. The article said that guidance will be provided by 'military-grade GPS.' So, no problem!

>>30103798
>Going 4500mph
>Traveling up to 400 miles
>Not self correcting
>Not guided
>>30103820
It isn't duck dive dip diving and dodging faggot, it's staying on course. Slight modifications to trajectory to ensure a direct hit on a moving target (chink ship) 19x past the horizon line. "Development of the rail gun guidance system is about done but circuits in the projectile must be hardened to withstand the forces involved" is an accurate statement, you're just a fucking tard.

>>30103820
ballistic missiles are an order of magnitude faster than these rail gun shells

File: 1464338966264.gif (897KB, 800x430px) Image search: [Google]

897KB, 800x430px

>>30103262
>bashing other people for having a supposed "shit-tier science understanding"
>while showcasing your own scientific ignorance on something as simple as the difference between watt and watt hour
gg, OP
you fucking mouthbreather

>>30103262
try using meme arrows for quotes you dink

>>30103798
>>30103820
How could someone be so certain yet know so little. It can make course corrections using GPS. This has been said countless times.

>>30103868
Uh, the OP literally pointed out that the journalist did not point out the difference between watt and watt hour.

Prove me wrong. Pro-tip, you can't.

>>30103849
You're correct that tiny corrections to course can ensure a direct hit. But achieving that will be as important as the railgun itself.

There is also the question of how much kinetic energy is still in a 25# projectile after a flight of 125 miles, given drag. I would like to be proven wrong, but I don't think it's a lot.

>>30103914
nah
if a house draws X amount of watts and the powerplant generates X amount of watts it will power the house indefinitely
OP asking for how long 25 megawatts can power 18k houses shows that he has no actual understanding of the difference between energy and energy transfer
and neither do you if you unironically defend him in his quest for stupidity

>>30103960
>Projectile traveling several times the speed of sound
>Not having asininely high KE
Leaving the barrel that 25lb projectile has 16,9 24,000 ft lbs of kinetic energy. Drag making it innefective? Guess naval guns and howitzers don't work either, you should tell someone about your amazing breakthrough in ballistics. You're digging the don't know what you're talking about hole deeper with each post OP.

>>30103823
School's out, huh?

File: 1463566647677.png (210KB, 377x295px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 377x295px

>>30103262

>>30103262
That article was shit, but not for the reasons you posited. Railguns kick ass.

>>30103262
I don't care what they think but I want to talk about railguns in general.

Man, wouldn't it be great to get rid of explosives in a ship?
Man, wouldn't it be great to have control over how fast the sabot leaves the muzzle?
Man, wouldn't it be great to have an actual precision artillery instead of 10m accuracy?

>>30103262
>>Um, anything launched by gunpowder accelerates down the barrel as the powder profligates behind it. (Except for the Gyrojet bullets! (And all rockets))
>Um
>UM
fuck off

>>30103830
>>30103573
>Literal retard can't handle the fact that his middle school education can't hold up to the banter.
And this class is what a Forbes transplant looks like.

Now run along back to your safe space, humans are talking here.

>>30103866
>ballistic missiles are an order of magnitude faster than these rail gun shells
No one is going to pick up on this?

What ballistic missiles have you seen that travel 86,000 km/h, or 0.00769c

File: 1301835630751.png (144KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 800x600px

>>30103262
>'In conventional guns, a bullet loses velocity from the moment the gunpowder ignites and sends it flying. The railgun projectile instead gains speed as it travels the length of a 32-foot barrel, exiting the muzzle at 4,500 miles an hour, or more than a mile a second.'

>Um, anything launched by gunpowder accelerates down the barrel as the powder profligates behind it. (Except for the Gyrojet bullets! (And all rockets))

The wording is poor but the meaning is correct. In a traditional gun the projectile's rate of acceleration slows as it travels down the barrel. I am guessing you do not understand why.

Jesus, what a shit thread

>>30105926

There were some ridiculously fast ABM interceptors played with, but yeah..

None were that fast.
"Sprint" was only ~12K KPH.

>>30105926
>>30107167
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_%28spacecraft%29

The probes are notable for having set a maximum speed record among spacecraft at 252,792 km/h

>>30107258

Yeah, because there are obvious parallels between probes in the vacuum of space, and terrestrial objects that travel through an atmosphere. If you're going to compare objects traveling fast to missiles, you should have used the manhole cover that achieved escape velocity

>>30107334
I don't know what your saying

>>30107361
I don't understand why you're mentioning objects in space when we're talking about terrestrial objects. They're two completely different things

>>30107394
ballistic missiles go to space

File: 1463555894917.jpg (8KB, 200x282px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 200x282px

>>30107095
>In a traditional gun the projectile's rate of acceleration slows as it travels down the barrel

>>30107361
What anon is saying is that you cant compare an object that can freely accelerate in the vaccum of space to an object that has to deal with atmosphere. with enough speed an object can ignite the air around it from friction because atmosphere gets in the way of the object, thus slowing it down.

The manhole cover thing was from a subterranean nuclear test that launched a manhole cover past a camera where its speed was easily hitting escape velocity. In all likelihood that shit vaporized.

>>30107402
I learned something new, but since ballistic missiles have to re-enter the atmosphere and spend time in it, there's still not much of a comparison between them and a probe that spends its time orbiting the sun. Considering the weight of fuel required to get to those speeds, and the time required to accelerate and decelerate you would probably have to orbit the planet a few times. Also I'm going to hazard a guess that those probes used gravitational sling shotting to achieve that speed

>>30107431
I will be nice and give you a clue, gas.

>>30107095
that's where it accelerates my fat friend, it decelerates when it leaves the barrel and the gases behind stop pushing it. That's why a gun with a longer barrel can achieve the maximum potential velocity of a bullet as opposed to a short barrel.

>>30107504
key word RATE of acceleration as the pressure on the back of the bullet decreases as it moves down the barrel it is accelerating just not as quickly as before

File: 1415326527532.jpg (45KB, 627x960px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 627x960px

>>30107504
>In a traditional gun the projectile's rate of acceleration
>the projectile's rate of acceleration
>rate of acceleration
>rate

Thank you for confirming 'I am guessing you do not understand why.'

>>30105606
Those things are all great and should have been the focus of the article instead of silliness.

>>30107773
That's not good enough clickbait though. Fearmongering with China gets that ad revenue.

>>30107773
Do you really think the average WSJ reader knows the intricacies of military weaponry?

>>30107504
That is what he said.

>>30108058
No, I said the rate of acceleration slows as the projectile moves down the barrel. As this >>30107578 anon was getting at, when the projectile moves down the barrel there is more room for the gasses which lowers the pressure pushing on the projectile.

If you make a barrel long enough the projectile will actually start decelerating.

>>30103734
So, that's like 10 13 watt CFLs for 10 hours, plus about enough left over to charge your phone.

>>30109443
And then I just realized that it's continuous output.

Ok, call me a retard but at least make it entertaining.

File: bluaHEAH.gif (1MB, 497x283px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 497x283px

>>30103262
>>30103573
>>30103830
>>30104463
Jesus woodworking Christ OP haven't you ever heard the phrase, "don't throw stones if you live in a glass house," before?

now remember kids, Sir Isaac newton is the deadliest son of a bitch in space.

>>30103573

You are the retard, first post is right.

Watts is a measure of power, the article says a power plant generating 25MW is enough to power 18,750 homes, which sounds reasonable if the average home draws about 1300 watts.

You got confused because Railguns are usually quantified in Joules, which is a unit of energy, and you can't state how many houses that would power without specifying time.

The article talks about the power output of the power plant powering the railgun, not the KE of a railgun shot.

>>30103866
You aren't serious are you?

Two weeks ago I watched a pair of M777s shoot at targets fifteen thousand meters away.
One howitzer used the current system, GPS, fucking great FO, AFITAS, met, muzzle velocity measurement and the rest.
The second gun used a course correcting fuse.
Four rounds each, the howitzer firing totally dumb shells hit the target four times with a CEP of twelve meters.
The CCF missed by over a hundred meters each time.
The CCF just could not correct for high alt winds.
A good gun team will beat the computer every time because the computer can only use information it has, a d that is outdated the instant it leaves the loading rack.

>>30103262
learn to greentext

>>30110981
what is a ccf?