The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Crazy Horse on February 04, 2008, 02:22:24 PM

Title: Navy's "Big Gun"
Post by: Crazy Horse on February 04, 2008, 02:22:24 PM
This is funny.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2816263

Quote
Quote
leftchick  (1000+ posts)       Mon Feb-04-08 01:56 PM
Original message
U.S. Navy's new ''big gun'' to replace conventional weaponry
 Advertisements [?]I am so glad my tax dollars go to new weapons systems and not those fascist government programs like Universal Healthcare.


The test-firing, captured on video, took place Jan. 31 in Dahlgren, Va., and Navy officials called it the ''world's most powerful electromagnetic railgun.'' The Navy's current MK 45 five-inch gun has a range of less than 23 miles (37 kilometers).

http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=580603

The big gun uses electromagnetic energy instead of explosive chemical propellants to fire a projectile farther and faster. The railgun, as it is called, will ultimately fire a projectile more than 230 miles (370 kilometers) with a muzzle velocity seven times the speed of sound (Mach 7) and a velocity of Mach 5 at impact.

<snip>

"I never ever want to see a Sailor or Marine in a fair fight. I always want them to have the advantage," said Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Gary Roughead. "We should never lose sight of always looking for the next big thing, always looking to make our capability better, more effective than what anyone else can put on the battlefield."

The railgun has been a featured weapon in many science fiction adventures, such as the new "Battlestar Galactic" series. It has also achieved newfound popularity among the 20-something-and-under generation for its devastating ability to instantaneously shoot a "slug" through walls and through multiple enemies in video games such as the "Quake" series of first person shooters.

The railgun's high-velocity projectile will destroy targets with sheer kinetic energy rather than with conventional explosives.

They show a picture from a tv show or a movie as the rail gun.

Quote
EmperorHasNoClothes  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. You never know when there might be a terrorist 230 miles away

   
that's shorter than a tomahawk ya dumbass, and with no warhead or charge.....alot cheaper.

Quote
wtmusic  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. If only we had one on the USS Cole nt

 
WTF.................

Quote
thereismore  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. I think that pic is from Battlestar Galactica. Can't believe there's a guy firing his weapon at 
 the camera.


Quote
leftchick  (1000+ posts)       Mon Feb-04-08 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. he mentions BG
 in the article. Sci-Fi is here.


Quote
ReformedChris (40 posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. I have a sickening feeling our own citizens could one day stare down the barell of this weapon! nt


Quote
Marr  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
5. What's with the purple light?
 Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 02:06 PM by Marr
I didn't realize railguns emitted anything besides projectiles.

 :thatsright:
Quote
shain from kane (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
6. "... more effective than what anyone else can put on the battlefield." - Ain't we already there?

 
Quote
wtmusic  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. The premise is we can hit a target at 230 miles
 through intervening weather? Sounds like 100% boondoggle to me.

While they're trying to aim that thing they're killing us one by one with IEDs.

Thrice armed is he who hath his quarrel just


Quote
Aya Reiko  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. An additional facet to consider too.
 Rail ammo contain no explosives and require less storage space.


Quote
Phoonzang (540 posts)       Mon Feb-04-08 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. I wonder if this is actually costing a lot of money..
 The video I saw of the demonstration had a guy in a hunting camo jacket and Bud Light cap loading the gun with a plastic bucket (a sabot round I guess).


Quote
mainegreen  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
10. So, will a EMP render this gun useless?

 
Quote
nadinbrzezinski  (1000+ posts)       Mon Feb-04-08 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
13. Ok as a sci fi writer this sucks
 serious... well back to the drawing board for them nasty Hallas systems naval guns.

But I hate to say it, the coolness factor is there... and you know where many of these systems were tested? Have you ever ridden the Superman Adventure as Six Flags in Cali? That game uses the same principles

 
What a complete idiot

Quote
Paulie  (1000+ posts)       Mon Feb-04-08 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
15. What about the power supply?
 Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 02:32 PM by Paulie
They going to hardwire it to a power plant? They going to run a cable from a ship while doing an amphibious assault? Because you know they won't just want it to be a standoff weapon on ship, they will want it mounted on a LCAC... with no cargo but a spool of wire.
 
 
Quote
Aya Reiko  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Easy, nuclear power.
 Carriers and Subs are all nuke. Next-gen Cruisers are all going to be nuke too.

Railguns are intended to replace the mounted guns currently used on ships.



Are the Primitives less knowing of economics or the military
Title: Re: Navy's "Big Gun"
Post by: jukin on February 04, 2008, 05:32:10 PM
Quote
Are the Primitives less knowing of economics or the military

It is a close race between over 20,000 subjects that DUchebags now less about.  Contrasted with being at the top of the game in pot smoking, welfare cheating, SSDI, Section 8 forms, where to buy cheetos, and general mooching.
Title: Re: Navy's "Big Gun"
Post by: asdf2231 on February 04, 2008, 08:03:54 PM
(http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l307/asdf2231/smileys%20and%20fun/cats/railguncat.png)
Title: Re: Navy's "Big Gun"
Post by: Atomic Lib Smasher on February 04, 2008, 09:01:25 PM
Quote
ReformedChris (40 posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. I have a sickening feeling our own citizens could one day stare down the barell of this weapon! nt


Sure, if you plan on going to ****istan and siding with the enemy, ya just might DUmmy.  :censored:

Title: Re: Navy's "Big Gun"
Post by: Attero Dominatus on February 04, 2008, 09:08:13 PM
Quote
Marr  (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-04-08 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
5. What's with the purple light?
 Edited on Mon Feb-04-08 02:06 PM by Marr
I didn't realize railguns emitted anything besides projectiles.

 :mental: :mental: :mental:

That screenshot is from a TV show you DUmbass. The light is special effects.
Title: Re: Navy's "Big Gun"
Post by: TheSarge on February 04, 2008, 09:15:50 PM
Quote
leftchick  (1000+ posts)       Mon Feb-04-08 01:56 PM
Original message
U.S. Navy's new ''big gun'' to replace conventional weaponry
 Advertisements [?]I am so glad my tax dollars go to new weapons systems and not those fascist government programs like Universal Healthcare.

The Constitution says the Government is supposed to protect and defend the country.  That's why we continue to work on those shiny new weapons systems. 

Nowhere...NOWHERE in the Constitution...the Bill Of Rights or the Declaration of Independence does it say the Federal Government is supposed to give your lazy ass FREE FRIGGIN' HEALTHCARE!
 :thatsright:
 :censored:


Title: Re: Navy's "Big Gun"
Post by: Bondai on February 04, 2008, 10:08:19 PM
When I saw the title of the thread I thought it was about TiT, being the Navy's "big gun" and all.....