TomS said:It's not a huge shock to see G.A. working on this, though. They are the lead on the Navy's electromagnetic launch system (catapult) effort, so they have plenty of expertise on pulsed power applications. EMALS is more of a linear motor/coil gun, but some of the support technologies are certainly transferable.
Here's the page for GA's Advanced Weapon Launcher system program.
http://atg.ga.com/EM/defense/railgun/index.php
In 2007, building upon knowledge gained under an Office of Naval Research (ONR) Innovative Naval Prototype contract, GA initiated development of the Blitzer™ system using internal funds to accomplish two major objectives:
- Demonstrate the technical maturity of tactically relevant railgun technologies in a proving-ground environment.
- Generate interest in the viability of smaller Electromagnetic (EM) gun systems for use in a broader set of missions, including integrated air and missile defense (IAMD).
GA accomplished both of these objectives by demonstrating the launcher and power system technologies to full design levels in 2009 during testing with non-aerodynamic rounds, followed by testing of aerodynamic rounds during the fall of 2010.
The tests demonstrated the integration and capabilities of a tactically relevant EM Railgun launcher, pulsed power system, and projectile. The projectiles were launched by Blitzer at Mach 5 with acceleration levels exceeding 60,000 gee, and exhibited repeatable sabot separation and stable flight.
General Atomics video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWZPp3aEjuM
wholey unconvinced hydro is not a solution especially as LG potential ranges are far beyond plus there are plenty alternatives to LG.TomS said:Any solution that requires storing significant volumes of hydrogen on board strikes me as unlikely to gain much traction. It's not so much that it's hazardous (it's not, especially), but it's a nuisance from a maintenance perspective (hydrogen embrittlement, leakage, etc.), it's not very energy-dense (so it consumes a lot of volume), and it would surely be a pain to replenish at sea (cryogenic lines in a CONREP -- no thank you!).
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Oct. 9, 2012
By the Office of Naval Research
ARLINGTON, Va.—The Office of Naval Research’s (ONR) Electromagnetic (EM) Railgun program is evaluating the second of two industry railgun prototype launchers at a facility in Dahlgren, Va., officials announced today.
The EM Railgun launcher is a long-range naval weapon that fires projectiles using electricity instead of traditional gun propellants such as explosive chemicals. Magnetic fields created by high electrical currents accelerate a sliding metal conductor, or armature, between two rails to launch projectiles at 4,500-5,600 mph.
The Navy is pursuing development of the launcher system through two industry teams—General Atomics and BAE Systems—to reduce risk in the program and to foster innovation in next-generation shipboard weapons.
“It’s exciting to see how two different teams are both delivering very relevant but unique launcher solutions,” said Roger Ellis, EM Railgun program manager.
General Atomics has delivered its prototype launcher to Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Dahlgren Division, where engineers have engaged in a series of tests similar to the evaluations conducted on the prototype demonstrator made by BAE Systems that arrived on Jan. 30.
“We’re evaluating and learning from both prototype designs, and we’ll be folding what we learn from the evaluations into the next phase of the program,” said Ellis.
Both General Atomics and BAE Systems are commencing work on concept designs for a next-generation prototype EM Railgun capable of increased firing rates. This includes continued development of automatic projectile loading systems and thermal management systems for the barrel. Officials plan to evaluate the concept designs at the end of the year.
The EM Railgun is an Innovative Naval Prototype being managed by ONR’s Naval Air Warfare and Weapons Department. The two prototype demonstrators incorporate advanced composites and improved barrel life performance resulting from development efforts on laboratory railgun systems located at the Naval Research Laboratory and NSWC-Dahlgren Division.
The EM Railgun laboratory demonstrator based at NSWC-Dahlgren Division fired a world record setting 33-megajoule shot in December 2010. One megajoule of energy is equivalent to a 1-ton car traveling at 100 miles per hour.
Source:
http://www.onr.navy.mil/en/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2012/Electromagnetic-Railgun-General-Atomics-Prototype.aspx
Very interesting, since I thought that the Senate Armed Service Committee voted to end funding of the Electromagnetic Rail Gun on June 20, 2011.
General Atomics unveiled a land-based artillery version of its Blitzer electromagnetic railgun (EMRG) at the Association of the US Army (AUSA) conference in Washington, DC, with a company official telling IHS Jane's that with adequate funding the concept could be ready for production in "two to three years".
Blitzer began as a 2007 US Office of Naval Research programme to develop prototype technologies to support the US Navy's (USN's) futuristic railgun programme, which is now led by BAE Systems and Boeing.
Despite 2010 testing that included firing a projectile up to Mach 5 speeds the USN opted to develop a larger railgun.
MINNEAPOLIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--BAE Systems has received a $33.6 million contract from the Office of Naval Research (ONR) to develop and demonstrate a Hyper Velocity Projectile (HVP). The HVP is a next-generation, guided projectile capable of completing multiple missions for the Electromagnetic Railgun, as well as existing 5-inch and 155-mm gun systems. This competitive award marks the initiation of Phase 1A of the program.
“The HVP takes the next evolutionary step in providing an affordable, precise, multi-mission capability for multiple gun platforms,” said Chris Hughes, vice president and general manager of Weapon Systems at BAE Systems. “We look forward to applying our expertise and technologies to this important program.”
The HVP is designed to provide lethality and performance enhancements to current and future gun systems. The objective of the first phase is to produce a concept design and development roadmap towards fully guided flight demonstrations.
BAE Systems, along with teammates United Technologies and Custom Analytical Engineering Systems (CAES), will develop and demonstrate a modular, low drag HVP. The modular design will allow the HVP to be configured for multiple gun systems and to address different missions. BAE Systems will build on its recent Long Range Land Attack Projectile and Multi-Service Standard Guided Projectile development and demonstration successes to apply innovative and proven designs to the next-generation projectile.
Work on the HVP contract is expected to begin immediately, with its initial phase to be completed by June 2014. The development will be carried out by BAE Systems in Minneapolis, Minnesota; UTC Aerospace Systems in Vergennes, Vermont; and CAES in Flintstone, Maryland.
The US Navy’s Office of Naval Research (ONR) recently announced that it has moved onto the second phase of testing for their surface ship mounted, electromagnetic rail gun.
Initiated in 2005, the Navy’s rail gun project has made major strides in the last few years; recently conducting a successful firing test that saw the supersonic weapon hit its target with 100% accuracy.
Designed as a long-range weapon, the ONR’s rail gun was designed to shoot projectiles up to 100 miles at speeds ranging from 7,442-8,851 km/h (4,500-5,500 mph). Using energy stored aboard a ship, the weapon would employ a high-energy electrical pulse to blast 14.5kg (23lb), high velocity rounds from 155mm canons aboard a naval vessel.
Although its performance specs are thoroughly impressive, the Navy is also interested in the weapon as a cost saving measure. According to Rear Adm. Matthew Klunder, Chief of Naval Research, a rail gun round costs about $25,000, which is a pittance when you compare it to the $1.5M price tag of a Tomahawk cruise missile.
While the engineering behind the weapon’s electrical systems appears to be functional, more design work is needed to create cooling systems that will allow an extremely hot, high-energy rail gun to fire multiple rounds in rapid succession.
“We’ve gone through prototype phase 1 and had two industry gun systems. We’re now on phase two which will give us multiple rounds per minute,” said Klunder.
In the coming years the Navy has plans to develop the infrastructure and technology required to realize a fully functional rail gun. If all goes according to plan the first seaborne firing of the new high-energy, high caliber weapon could happen sometime in 2016, effectively extending the reach of US Navy weapons threefold.
starviking said:That exec is either hyping things or is an MBA removed from reality - railguns require physical ammunition, they don't require propellant however.
JFC Fuller said:starviking said:That exec is either hyping things or is an MBA removed from reality - railguns require physical ammunition, they don't require propellant however.
You could argue that the giant amount of fuel that will need to be burnt in the multiple generators required to produce sufficient electricity to fire the rail gun constitutes the propellent. Putting AMDR on Burke Flight III is requiring a 33% increase in the output of the generators- add a rail gun in place of the 5" and a pair of lasers in place of Phalanx and things are going to get interesting....
sferrin said:JFC Fuller said:You could argue that the giant amount of fuel that will need to be burnt in the multiple generators required to produce sufficient electricity to fire the rail gun constitutes the propellent. Putting AMDR on Burke Flight III is requiring a 33% increase in the output of the generators- add a rail gun in place of the 5" and a pair of lasers in place of Phalanx and things are going to get interesting....
Now put a nuclear reactor down below. . .
Burke FIII is unlikely to get either. The subclass won't have an integrated power system, you're not doing Railguns and Directed Energy Weapons on a large scale without one. The three Zumwalts will be the Rail/DEW testbeds, whatever comes of the Next Generation Surface Combatant program will get them next.JFC Fuller said:starviking said:That exec is either hyping things or is an MBA removed from reality - railguns require physical ammunition, they don't require propellant however.
You could argue that the giant amount of fuel that will need to be burnt in the multiple generators required to produce sufficient electricity to fire the rail gun constitutes the propellent. Putting AMDR on Burke Flight III is requiring a 33% increase in the output of the generators- add a rail gun in place of the 5" and a pair of lasers in place of Phalanx and things are going to get interesting....