Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
Also, difference between a railgun and a coilgun: Railgun has current flowing along one rail, across a linking bar, and back down the other rail. The magnetic forces push the bar along the rails, which pushes the projectile. They also act to push the rails apart, hence all the bolts. Coilgun has a series of electromagnets, triggered in sequence. Advantage is no moving electrical contacts like with the railgun, drawback is need to control the switching of the magnets.
it would fire once every 45 seconds on it, and in this configuration be HALF the size of a current MLRS system with 10 times the range and 10 times the damage. With this the fire rate would be the SAME as the current MLRS system.
So WTF are you talking about with saying it`s not fesable? The only point to that would be the fact the capacitors for this would take up a room the size of two tanks, but you didn`t even mention that. For tripple the size and 10 times the damage that`s just fine to mount on a ship.
i read that thing about railguns and i figured they were normal guns, with rails to accelerate the bullet.... *confused*
Still, a two-foot-long tungsten rod fired out of one of these reaches upper orbit, and when it comes down it digs around half a mile into the ground, completely destroying anything within a mile of the impact point, with no explosives required.
A much more likely weapon is the coilgun. Less damage, but far less energy needed.
Holy hell man, it`s amazing how we went from giant battleships in WW2 to the tiny Zumwalt class destroyer with a hundred times more firepower.
i dont wanna gethit by one of those
yadda yadda yadda
necroswe know you just say lol, awesome, roflmao because you want the first post.