• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

General Atomics Electromagnetic Rail Gun

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,948
Reaction score
285
Jemiba said:
fredymac said:
Posts for railguns are spread over several boards. Can these all be consolidated?
That's easy, but we would get an estimated 20+ pages thread then !
We have this thread (GA rail gun development), one about rail guns in the orbit, gun on ships,
and about deployability of such weapons. The latter two actually are somewhat overlapping, but
there are more general questions in it, too. And rail guns are mentioned in other threads, but not
as main themes.
So I'm not sure, if things really get better by merging those threads.
But perhaps someone can enlighten me about affiliation the GA to the BAe models, as the latter one
is mentioned in several posts.
We could split BAe, or change the title, if useful.
They are two completely separate projects. Like the YF-22 and YF-23.
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
66
Jemiba said:
fredymac said:
Posts for railguns are spread over several boards. Can these all be consolidated?
That's easy, but we would get an estimated 20+ pages thread then !
We have this thread (GA rail gun development), one about rail guns in the orbit, gun on ships,
and about deployability of such weapons. The latter two actually are somewhat overlapping, but
there are more general questions in it, too. And rail guns are mentioned in other threads, but not
as main themes.
So I'm not sure, if things really get better by merging those threads.
But perhaps someone can enlighten me about affiliation the GA to the BAe models, as the latter one
is mentioned in several posts. We could split BAe, or change the title, if useful.




I would like to see a single thread for general railgun development which would include any specific contractor (which really only means BAe and General Atomics at the moment). Most railgun news pertains to this development program. As an example of this, the FA-XX or LRS-B threads are program based and not contractor specific. The tradeoff is a long thread which consolidates posts or scattered threads. I would handle the long thread by simply closing it at say 10 pages and starting a continuation thread.


For special developments such as the railgun deployment to sea, a separate thread could be used.


And of course, a formal railgun project leading to a deployed weapon would merit its’ own thread.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,948
Reaction score
285
Personally I'd prefer "Railgun: General Atomics", "Railgun: BAE Systems", and "Railgun: General" threads. Both GA and BAE Systems railguns have history and development programs, as well as future plans, associated with them, and dumping them altogether would just make a mess. Aside from that there is railgun R&D going back to at least the 80s that has nothing to do with either, and really doesn't belong in the same threads.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,002
Reaction score
172
I think, we have to got the latter way. When merged, posts are sorted in chronological
order and this could make reading a bit difficult.

Posts about the BAe rail gun development can be found here :
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,24955.msg220772.html#msg220772

General questions and should be posted here :
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2110.msg247545.html#msg247545

and posts about the GA rail gun remain here. (Sorry for that vagueness :-[ )


If there are posts, which you think should be moved, or you're totally unhappy with a thread
title, please tell me.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,948
Reaction score
285
Are the posts about General Atomics railgun in the BAE thread or the General Information thread?
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
146
sferrin said:
Are the posts about General Atomics railgun in the BAE thread or the General Information thread?
I think Jemiba's post implies this one for GA and then the ones listed for other rail gun information.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,948
Reaction score
285
bobbymike said:
sferrin said:
Are the posts about General Atomics railgun in the BAE thread or the General Information thread?
I think Jemiba's post implies this one for GA and then the ones listed for other rail gun information.
Ah. Dur. :-[
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
66
http://www.ga.com/general-atomics-completes-successful-open-range-testing-of-railgun-projectile-guidance-electronics-unit

------------------------------------------------
San Diego, CA, 13 March 2016 - General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems (GA-EMS) announced today that their hypersonic projectiles with prototype components for their Guidance Electronics Unit (GEU) successfully performed programmed actions and communicated component performance to a ground station via a telemetry link in tests carried out 7-9 March 2016 at the U.S. Army Dugway Proving Ground in Utah. The GEU, housed in the aerodynamically stable test projectile consists of a number of components, including integrated navigation sensors and processors for guidance, navigation and control.

The five test projectiles were fired at accelerations greater than 30,000 times that of gravity (>30,000 gees) from GA-EMS' 3 mega joule Blitzer® electromagnetic railgun system. The projectiles and the critical components within them experienced, survived and operated in the multi-Tesla magnetic field within the launcher and the overall launch environment. All of the GEU components performed as expected during and after the launch event, and through multiple seconds of aero-stable flight.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
146
General Atomics Multimission Medium Range Railgun Weapon System (MMRRWS)

http://nextbigfuture.com/2016/05/general-atomics-will-fund-development.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29&utm_content=FaceBook
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
66
Tests of medium (?) size railgun at Dugway Proving Grounds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tDumZiAqc
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
146
http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20170309-atomics.html

Next generation pulsed power container.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
146
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/10/general-atomics-get-advanced-electromechnical-tech-for-railgun-weapon-system.html
 

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
66
GA news item

"SAN DIEGO, CA, 01 MAR 2018 - General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems (GA-EMS) announced that it has been awarded a contract from the U.S. Army through the Defense Ordnance Technology Consortium (DOTC) to evaluate and mature electromagnetic railgun weapon system capabilities to support the U.S. Army Armament Research, Development, and Engineering Command (ARDEC). The three year period of performance contract will team GA-EMS with ARDEC to advance railgun technologies, deliver a series of prototypes, and perform system integration and testing for mission effectiveness and possible integration with existing and future Army vehicles."

http://www.ga.com/general-atomics-awarded-army-contract-to-advance-railgun-weapon-system-technology
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
146
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2018/4/23/armys-pursuit-of--electromagnetic-railguns-heats-up

General Atomics has been awarded a contract to develop electromagnetic railgun technology for the Army as the service pursues cutting-edge weapons to take on advanced adversaries.

The Army’s growing interest in this capability comes after years of research by the Navy, which has yet to field one of the weapons.

Railguns utilize magnetic fields generated by electrical currents to slide a projectile between two rails inside the barrel. The technology enables the projectiles to travel at hypersonic speeds of Mach 5 (3,800 miles per hour) or faster. When the systems are mature, they are expected to have far greater range and lethality than standard artillery or naval guns.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,948
Reaction score
285
Back in the day (mid/late 80's) there was a concept with a railgun (might have been a coil gun) on an armored chassis. There was a generator mounted transversely along the rear of the vehicle that looked like the fuel tanks on an old T-72.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,289
Reaction score
29
Betting the below is not BAE of GA and it was started w/ light gas. Not a pure EMRG. Govy owned and that is best way for some time as the best chemical/electro magnetic combination is necessary to perfect and then to perfect into an operational system. That is some years off.

UT Austin has had a railgun for Army research in the past and appears to be still be working generators, (turns out fuel is better for EMRGs than Nuke power). That mightt be why Blitzer was turned down. Better stuff in the works.



https://www.globalsecurity.org › space › systems › eml

...."Thunderbolt EML, was a ground-based demonstrator operated by the Defense Nuclear Agency. The goal of the Thunderbolt program is to continue development of the Thunderbolt EML to enable the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) to deploy a spaced-based kinetic energy weapon system.
The Thunderbolt EML is fired by injecting the projectile by means of a single-stage light gas gun, A gas gun is used because it reduces the barrel erosion that occurs when the projectile is electromagnetically accelerated, When the projectile enters the EML from the gas gun, it is traveling at about 1 kilometer per second, At the entry point into the barrel, current is applied as described above and the projectile is electromagnetically accelerated.
In previous EML experiments, the maximum velocity attained after electromagnetic acceleration has been 6 kilometers per second, The focus of this particular contract is to determine why there is a 6 kilometers per second ceiling after electromagnetic acceleration and to design or redesign the Thunderbolt EML to 10-kilometers per second velocity. The 6-kilometers per second ceiling experienced in the Thunderbolt EML is caused by erosion of material from the inner walls of the barrel that occurs when the projectile is electromagnetically accelerated, as the ablated mass adds to the plasma mass already present and reduces the projectile acceleration because of the extra mass and drag of this material. Research on various EMLs supports the hypothesis that radiative ablation is a significant factor as well."
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,948
Reaction score
285
(turns out fuel is better for EMRGs than Nuke power).
I wasn't aware electricity generated with fuel was different than that generated with nuclear power.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,289
Reaction score
29
(turns out fuel is better for EMRGs than Nuke power).
I wasn't aware electricity generated with fuel was different than that generated with nuclear power.
"Nuclear reactors [are energy dense, but not very power dense]. Turbines have great power densities. This is 27000 hp (20 MW), almost enough to power an early LA class submarine. A reactor's shielding alone is much larger and heavier."


"Using flywheels, SAIC estimated 46,000 peak g's (64 MJ, Mach 7+).
Capacitors might output a smoother power pulse, yielding a flatter acceleration profile and lower peak g's (lower stress). This relaxes the material requirements somewhat for both the barrel and round... thus cheaper/easier/sooner to mature. Maybe that's why the navy went with caps. (I've seen literally NO ONE advocate for caps over flywheels in ANY publication ANYWHERE---flywheels were a foregone conclusion---so I'm still bewildered why the Navy chose capacitors.)"

Naval Railgun FAQ & Primer (v1.0.3)

/u/HephaestusAetnaean 2015-18
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
69
A 32 MJ EMRG needs about 24 MW to sustain a 10 rpm firing rate.
For a land-based system, that's a big ask for the portable nuclear reactors under consideration.

But it's only 2/3rds of a gallon of JP or diesel.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,948
Reaction score
285
A 32 MJ EMRG needs about 24 MW to sustain a 10 rpm firing rate.
For a land-based system, that's a big ask for the portable nuclear reactors under consideration.

But it's only 2/3rds of a gallon of JP or diesel.
That makes sense for land-based mobile. I must have missed that in the earlier post.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,289
Reaction score
29
Capacitors, square barrels, and pure EMRG are steps backwards Navy.
 

Attachments

Top