Military Video Captures Destructive Power of Navy’s Newest Railgun
- Posted on February 28, 2012 at 4:53pm by
Buck Sexton
- Print »
- Email »
This weapon could one day revolutionize warfare.
It’s a new version of the railgun, and it packs an earth-shattering, hypersonic punch.
In the past, railguns have been high-tech but massive beasts that looked like only the largest naval ships could handle one. With continued testing and experimentation, that’s starting to change.
As you can see from the screenshot above depicting the loading of a prototype rail gun built by defense contractor BAE, these amazing weapons are getting smaller, and inching closer to combat readiness.
Gizmodo lays out just how incredible this new weapon is, stating that ”it fires a 40-pound metal slug up to 5,600 miles per hour… slamming into its target with 32 times the force of a 1-ton car being thrust at 100 mph.”
Below you can see the oddly shaped projectile ripping through heavy barriers like butter.
Gizmodo contacted the Navy, and they agreed that the technology is becoming more compact and therefore more usable. ”It finally looks like a gun,” the Navy said.
Rail guns are designed to destroy basically anything, anywhere, on the land, sea, or in the air. The Navy may one day destroy the biggest, most expensive ships with nothing but a hunk of metal traveling really, really fast.
The military even hopes to use rail guns one day to shoot down incoming missiles.
It’s a true marvel of science, as all of this is accomplished with nothing more than kinetic energy. The projectiles do not contain any explosives. In fact, the Navy has been using non-aerodynamic rounds on purpose in tests so that a round doesn’t go off-range and smash through a neighboring town or interstate.
One day, however, the Navy will be using conical projectiles for maximum penetration.
The Navy plans to continue testing rail guns over the next five years, eventually pushing the energy used to 32 megajoules- – over even more.
It hasn’t happened yet, but one day, the railgun may change the way wars are fought.
Watch the incredible clip of the newest railgun model in action here, courtesy of BAE systems:
(h/t Gizmodo)
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 706 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 556 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 370 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 363 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 362 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 363 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 370 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 286 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 363 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (255)
McNamara
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:42pmTalk about throwing a wrench into something. Wow.
Report Post »sooner12
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 8:08pmCan I have one?
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 8:26pmDon’t the Japanese already use these for Whale hunting? (end sarcasm)
(Do not show this to the Japanese)
Report Post »Freedom.Fighter
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 11:41pmSo we don;t have money to go to Mars and our citizens barely have money to pay for gas, but we have plenty to gove to more weapons of war. I would say this is evidence of a priority issue. When will our government learn? I;m sure most people watching it (especially the Navy) will just go “ooooohhh shiny! I want one,” but please don;t be one of those.
proudinfidel54
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:26amFREEDUMB.FIGHTER so you are saying the Gov. is wasting money on this when they could use it to feed 100 welfare families for a year, I guess. Your “Handle freedom.fighter”, implies that you want to fight for freedom, what do you propose we fight with, spitballs and slingshots. Your liberal, gun hating, true colors, are showing dispite your misleading name.
Report Post »Freedom.Fighter
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:45am@PROUDINFIDEL54
Your last line is just follish assumptions and sounds paranoid. I am definitely no liberal, but I am also definitely no Republican. No paty can claim me. I served 7 years in the Army, actually doing a little Reserve duty now. It’s logic and reason with which I suggest we use to prioritize. I propose we use something called a gun to defend with, perhaps even bombs. We are in no short supply of those. I bet you have even heard of them. The difference is that I suggest we DEFEND instead of OFFEND. Even though I despise welfare programs, at last that wouldn;t encourage war profiteering.
We must make it so that people benefit from peace instead of war. Until then, our politicians, defense contractors, and the military don’t really want to hear anything about victory. As for that last line, it’s crazy paranoia talk like that that makes people like me not want to be associated with being conservative anymore.
Report Post »Freedom.Fighter
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:47amGuaranteed the program will get scrapped anyway. It’s main purpose is most likely to keep the contractors of BAE and the Naval personell there employed with tax-payer money. Without it, they wouldn;t have the funds for this kind of research. That would be for good reason since the market has not interest. Not even a conservative can miss that.
Report Post »TSUNAMI-22
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:37am@ The-Monk
Don’t the Japanese already use these for Whale hunting? (end sarcasm)
(Do not show this to the Japanese)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shoot a horizontal stack of Korans with it.
( Do not show this to the m-u-s-l-o-i-d-s)
Report Post »Cherynn
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:37am@ Freedom.Fighter, If you really want to be a Constitutionalist you might want to check out the part that says provide for the common defence. Developing technology that keeps us ahead of our enemies is one of the responsabilities of the federal government. I dont see anywhere in the Constitution that says the federal government is supposed to collect taxes and redistribute the resources between the lazy and worthless. I dont see welfare or food stamps mentioned anywhere in the Constituion but provide for the common defence is mentioned, its why all the states join together to make the “Union”,,,you know United States.
I would much rather live in a country that leads the globe in technical supiority and encourages the best and brightest to be as successful as possible and rewards thier effort, not one that punishes the educated and ambitiouos to reward the ignorant and lazy. There is alot of truth to the saying “peace through superior fire power”. When you have the best and most effective weapons on the planet and the most skilled and trained soldiers no one will want to mess with you. I would rather have my tax dollars going towards protecting me rather than wasting the money on multi-generational leeches that think I owe them a living.
Report Post »RoyBaty
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:12amFreedomFighter needs a new name. Weapons are good, disarming is bad. This has been learned through centuries of experience. Ron Paul and his disciples will not change this by being pacifists (cowards).
Report Post »bane73
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:43am@FF: dude, ignoring for the moment ur argument that this program will ultimately be scrapped; ie: wasted, look at it this way: we all know how much traditional missiles and 5″ bullets (that are NOT merely hunks of lead as they are in a regular gun; they have explosives and incendiaries built into them) cost. A huge amount of money. They have to be periodically inspected and removed from the ship to be overhauled as they age. There’s a huge expense in maintaining them, not to mention their actual purchase-cost. If we could replace some of that with this gun that uses just big hunks of metal, we could be saving a ton of recurring expense.
Also, consider: many militaries around the world are scrambling to catch-up with us, arguably because they want to overpower us, which, even if they don’t seek to overthrow us, will mean that when our interests are opposed to theirs, it will mean a long, bloody war which our victory will not be certain. Given that, don‘t you think it’s in everyone’s interests that we continue R&D’ing to remain the most advanced military in the world that no one can provide a significant threat too? We may lose a battle or two here and there b/c we don‘t feel it’s worth it… but do we want to be in the position where we could lose an entire war that keeps us from, say, acquiring the energy our economy needs just to stay afloat?
Dude, I agree, there’s a ton of waste in the military we could cut; not sure this is one, though.
Report Post »freelancer91
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:49amIf you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a railgun…..
Report Post »DTOM_Jericho (Creator vindicator)
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:52am@Roy
Report Post »You’re an idiot and a liar. Ron Paul has CLEARLY stated that he wants to build up defense. He wants to reduced MILITARY SPENDING. There is a huge difference. Military spending abroad is different than defense spending at home. Even Beck should be able to figure this out. His view is that if we need to go to war then it should be declared through congress, we demolish our enemy, then return home. We do not stay there and build schools, libraries or a $1 billion dollar embassy. That is constitutional and it doesn’t have us performing social justice by means of unnecessary wars that mask our empire expansion. As for calling anyone a coward, you are doing it from behind a keyboard. Odd.
jnobfan
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:41amStupid – waste of money. What is this thing going to shoot? Another ship? We already have plenty of weapons systems for that that work just fine and we have not shot another hard navy target since WW2. It is not anti-aircraft. So now we are left with ship to shore. Its not a smart weapon so what are they going to do destroy a bridge or something?
Report Post »bane73
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:21am@JNO: First off, how do you know it can’t be used to hit aircraft? The article clearly stated it was planning on being used to hit incoming missiles, which is a lot harder to do than hit aircraft.
Second, taking out land-based targets at greater ranges than what the current 5″ guns can do (roughly only the distance of eye-sight) and cheaper than what missiles can do, would be really beneficial. We could provide much greater support to beaching land-forces with less risk to our ships than we can currently achieve.
Third, taking out a ship in a single-shot is a huge benefit. That we haven’t shot a real ship since WW2 is no argument — given the current aims of several countries to boost their navies and, in their own words, counter our naval forces, that is enough of a reason to keep R&Ding the latest and greatest anti-ship tech. If an enemy achieves sea-superiority right now, we are screwed. Just like in the early half of the 1900s, there is an energy-war ramping up. I guess you think we should relax and plan on losing?
Report Post »Cservice
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:51am“ooooohhh shiny! I want one,”
Report Post »Freedom.Fighter
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:19pmWow. So as a conservative aren’t you supposed to stand for conserving money? I understand the process of how programs like this work having done my time in the military and as a defense contractor. “In the name of defense” is a poor excuse to justify obsolete projects. And yes, believe or not, this project is outmoded. It was an idea put in during the Cold War as a plan for deterrence. Strategically, deterrence has been proven as a bad idea. With deterrence, even if you win, you lose. One reason is the exorbitant costs that it takes and the susceptibility to the element of surprise. The railgun no longer deters much since the next war will not be fought at sea.
Our #1 threat to the US is the US economy. Spending on projects from Reagan’s years are part of that problem. This is even a higher priority than terrorists and the railgun doesn;t even help there. Do you think that stops BAE from aggressively lobbying for the railgun project though? If you do, then you are naive.
Oh, and no, and cannot shoot down aircraft. The airborne laser that the air force has can’t eben do that. Neither can the Patriot missile system and that’s its only mission. Considering the recharge time on this sucker and its just a big shiny money-waster. I’m sure the “useful idiots” out there still want one though.
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:43pm“FREEDOM.FIGHTER So we don;t have money to go to Mars”
Are there terrorists on Mars?
“and our citizens barely have money to pay for gas,”
Tell them to lower the gas taxes if they care.
“but we have plenty to gove to more weapons of war.”
More guns, less crime.
Report Post »bane73
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:43pm@FF: I‘m curious how it is you know about it’s “recharge time”. Secondly, just b/c it was posed as an idea during the cold war doesn‘t mean it’s out-moded. Lots of ideas are floated all the time but aren’t implemented until much later when the tech. figures out how to actually make it work in the real world. I just got out of the Navy in 2006, an ST so I worked with torps but one of my duties was reloading the 5″. I can tell you, all the gunners thought that a rail-gun would be sweet (ie: not out-dated to them!) but they all seemed to think it would never happen b/c it would be too big to fit onboard and the power-supply would be more than the ship could handle. I understood it back then that it would be the ultimate gun-type of weapon but no one had yet been able to figure out how to actually get it on a relatively small ship.
So I‘m not so sure I’m buying the “it’s out-dated” argument.
I’m a fiscal-conservative; but there is plenty of stuff we can cut at the Fed. level before we start gutting the Fed’s 1st-priority. I understand the fiscal-problem we’re in. But the solution isn’t to start by making us militarly-weak.
BTW, if you don’t think the next war will be at sea, where will it be? Not sure the Chinese agree with you, they’ve been building their navy pretty aggressively.
Report Post »RonmeyPaulBotsrOdd
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:13pmFreedumbFighter = Paulbot
If you are in the military – you would realize that nobody joins out of sheer joy. They join mostly for tangible benefits. In other words – a gov’t welfare program! It is the one program that provides a benefit to both the recipient and the taxpayer. For those of you that served, survived and went on to something better – congrats!
Report Post »I remember an ETS briefing at Stewart after we got back…the person giving the reenlistment briefing kept telling everyone – “you are not going to make it out there…going to be living on beanie weenies and waiting months for an unemployment check”. 20 years later – I have to laugh about that!!! As for Paulbot FreedumbFighter – these weapons programs and other advances within the military have provided civilian jobs and innovation beyond your comprehension. Just look at the medium we are using to communicate and the jobs associated with it…
claymoremine
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:43pmI can appreciate some of the posts complaining about Govt. spending on weapons. However, think of it this way. I see it as a deterrence to Nuclear war. The idea of war is ridiculous and uncalled for in any sense but if we are going to go to war, it would be better using weapons that will not destroy humanity as we know it.
Report Post »its_time_to_arrest_our_government
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:52pmokay where do i get one!
Report Post »SLAPTHELEFT
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:01pmOoh shiny! I want one!
Report Post »Hollywood
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:08pmCanada just dumped it’s long gun registry. Where can I sign up for one of these?
Report Post »EPH612
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 2:51pmFreedom Figther is a Student from a Catholic University, her real name is Fluke and she wants weapons research money to go to her contraception coverage.
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 3:13pmsooner12. me too. i want one . wow.
Report Post »SavvyCowboy
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:46pmLet‘s slap one of these bad boys in a KC 130 gunship and aim it at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s house!
Report Post »Freedom.Fighter
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 8:24pmI guess if the conservatives in here hate me and the liberals in the msnbc newsvine room hate me, I must be doing something right! : )
If you aren’t willing to take the advice of someone who even has experience with the issue discussed, then that is the very definition of close-minded. I was hoping in this room logic and reason would rule at least more than the liberal rooms, but there is hardly a difference. Name-calling and baseless assumption are standard operating procedure in here as well. Too bad.
I noticed many commentors’ reliance on labels. Using labels is another excuse to not use discussion and reason. Must kill you to not be able to label me effectively. Nope, not a Paulbot either. I guess that’s the trouble with us independents. Yet, Glenn Beck is no conservative as well and yet you spend time on his website.
Whether your drinking the blue (dem) kool-aid or the red (repub) koo-aid, your still drinking it.
Report Post »goahead.makemyday
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 8:42amSavvy That would be cool but why not put them on tanks with two barrels? I know we could call it a Mammoth tank. (C&C reference for all who didn’t get it)
Report Post »IAMINFORMED
Posted on March 3, 2012 at 11:51am@FREELANCER91
A bullet travels max 3 to 5 times the speed of sound. Rockets are the same except for the “semi-successful” missle tests to shoot down ICBM’s the last couple of years. Rail guns can accelerate a projectile to 13+ times the speed of sound at current technology. Think about our Atom smashers that accelerate electrons to near the speed of light with the same technology. Understand that missiles cost $100K to 200K+ for each one fired. A dumb hunk of metal might cost $1K. The electricity needed to fire these guns is already being produced by large nuclear reactors on the Navy ships. Long term, this is better and cheaper technology.
@ Everyone who wants peace….
Report Post »There will always be some country or terrorist group that wants to destroy the “so-called” freedom we currently have here in the United States. Until we “wipe” them off the face of the earth which will never happen, we will always have to stay 5 steps ahead of them in technology. Don‘t be afraid of technology and don’t think we don’t have it. What do you think they are doing in Area 51, Area 52? This technology has been around for 30+ years. Same for the “lasers” they have been testing that can burn through 200 feet of steel in 1 minute. Our secret military has technology that is decades or centuries more advanced than what we publically see. They “leak” this technology as “new” technology, and yes, to keep these companies and military personel alive. If they don’t exist, who is going
IamWhatIam
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:41pmNice railgun. But somebody cannot do math!!
Report Post »F=m*a
40 x 5600 = 224000
2000 (1 tond) x 100 = 200000
So – its dosen’t seem the Slug can slam into its target with 32 times the force of a 1-ton car being thrust at 100 mph.”
The-Monk
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 8:04pmTry looking at your numbers again. Or were you bing sarcastic?
Report Post »Glock31
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 9:23pmim sure they are correct and you arent
Report Post »tripl-e
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 9:34pmForce = Mass * Acceleration (as in 1 Newton = 1KG accelerated at 1M/sec squared)
Report Post »You are confusing Acceleration with velocity
For kinetic energy based on mass and velocity use E=1/2 M*Velocity squared
My guess would be that their numbers are within reason.
Chuck Stein
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 11:06pmyou got it Triple-E: acceleration is meters per second per second (or feet per second per second) — the square makes a huge difference. One big thing to remember in physics is the units — remembering the units (and what they represent) is half of the solution.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:21amI Bet… the specs call for… from Washington, to hit any State Capitol!
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:55amThe last time I checked…
224 thousand (224,000) is a greater number than 200 thousand (200,000). Like I said, check your math or are you just being sarcastic.
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 1:58amOh, I get it… I didn’t see the “32 times” part. My bad.
Report Post »RedDawn2012
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 6:55amUsing the classical mechanics equation for kinetic energy, E=½(MV²), the energy of the projectile is 62 times the energy of the car in this example.
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:42amTripl-E, chuck, and Red got it right….you need to use the Kinetic Energy equation not the F=ma equation…then go backwards with Work = KE and Work = Force * distance
with the KE to W equation… you get 282 million Joules for the Rail Gun and 4.55 million Joules for the car….that is 37 times the energy…which means over the same distance of impact…the Rail Gun is 37.35 times as strong..or more forceful…however you would like to say it…
not bad when they are only targeted to put in 32 MegaJoules to the gun and they are getting nearly 9 times the output….
and yes…I WANT ONE!! well…I could build one actually but not on this scale…they really aren’t that hard to build in theory…it is just that if you want to throw something this big… 18.2 kg (40 lbs) that fast (5600 mph)…it takes WAY more energy than a domestic power grid can supply… I would have to black out my whole city to fire this thing once…. I am sure the BAE is directly linked to a nuclear facility or have one on base that is powering this device….
but a small one…say in a backpack…weighing 15-20 kilos… firing 1/4 lbs slugs at 600-1000 mph… forget a Barret 50 cal…sign me up….HooYah….
Report Post »Buck Shane
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:07amThis is no longer classified, so it is years behind the thinking. My guess is that this has a tremendous upside, but it has little as shown. The 16 inch guns on the Iowa class battle-wagons are obsolete, so this impacter, traveling in a flatter trajectory but with less force doesn’t work.
BUT, if this was used for the initial acceleration for that hypersonic scram-jet missile they are also testing, a naval ship could launch a kinetic impacter that could be aimed and strike anywhere on earth.
Hmmmmm!
Report Post »Mr. H.
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 11:52amYou screwed up the units, and need a couple more equations.
Report Post »IamWhatIam
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:39pmHey – the article stated FORCE – “it fires a 40-pound metal slug up to 5,600 miles per hour… slamming into its target with 32 times the force of a 1-ton car being thrust at 100 mph.”. Which NOT true. It is almost the same FORCE. Kinetic energy is DIFFERENT than FORCE. And in fact the Kenetic Energy of the Rail Gun is much greater. The Blaze copied this from Gizmodo. Gizmodo got it wrong – they mixed up force and Kinetic Energy and a few other details. If you read the original Navy release it of course states everything correctly (and different from The Blaze and Gizmodo).
Report Post »goahead.makemyday
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 8:49amVRW
Report Post »What kind of power supply would you use? Like you said They have some heavy duty power outputs going into these. I’m pretty sure the power required to fire even a small one is too great for the materials we have available. Other wise we would already have solders using them, remember the process of scientific progress is going from very large to very small. Computers, phones, and other modern tech is proof of this.
Joyzee
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:39pmThats a big nail gun
Report Post »Gravejoke
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 10:32pmThat’s right! And it will drive nails into drywall from miles away. xp
Report Post »chips1
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:22pmLet Japan have a crack at it. The transister radio was GREAT. (Yup, I’m that old)
Report Post »casseopea42
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:40pmPut me down for one.
Report Post »Dadwithallthecoolstuff
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:06pmI want one…I don’t care what you say !
Report Post »swmopatriot
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:52pmThat’s what a rod and piston looks like coming out the side of your block
Report Post »trashfree
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:36pmThe gun may be small but it sure looks like those are giant capacitors in the background.
Report Post »Rolandd
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:16amYou have to see the size of the gun in relation to somethig to judge the size. That bring said, almost half the bilding is capacitors and transformers. This is still a proof of concept stage program. The bugs are stll being worked out. From what I‘ve read it’s slated to fire seven to ten rounds a minute at mach 7.
Report Post »Puddle Duck
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:24amLook like giant inductor coils to me.
Report Post »JP4JOY
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:31pmI sure hope “Velocitas Eradico” is Latin for fast eradication and not Mexican for “it’s ours gringo”.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:06pmSi.
Report Post »Diego Roswell
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:20pmMilitary industrial complex 1 US tax payers 0
Report Post »frank002
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:28pmWhat is it with you liberals and the Military Industrial Complex? You are free to move to a country without a M I C.
Report Post »sndrman
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:37pmliberals would rather use the research money into cotton filler material to soak up all the (well you know) because they are big time V….living is a world where if we disarm ourselves then the crazy’s like n. korea,iran,syria, need i go on will be the only ones armed. same argument as take away guns from responsible people and only the villains will have guns,the thugs,the murderers and so on…..
Report Post »Nancy Kosling
Posted on March 3, 2012 at 2:37pmDiego, I agree with you. If our uppity voices for the American Contitution observation gets heard, will the government order this big-boy at our cities “for population control”. We are paying via taxes for the military complex to continue the arms race when we are the only player on the field. I have my family defense, but this isn’t a defense tool. This is kill all and leave nothing but dust. Thanks for your comments.
Report Post »Ironeagle
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:52pmUseless…same problem with the USAF airborne laser…too big, bulky, can’t be made portable on the battlefield. Waist of $$$$
Report Post »dfmcse
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:06pmRemember when computers were big as a house? Got to start somewhere.
Report Post »Libertyordeath73
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:28pm@DFMCSE – very true. There is always an experimental stage and the equipment always gets smaller. Cell phones and computers are perfect examples.
Report Post »Maxim Crux
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:45pmWrong…Not useless…very effective. They do not need projectiles by the way, they can shoot plasma beams that will have similar effects. Nuclear powered vessels meet the power requirements nicely.
Report Post »Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:48pmWhy are womens butts the opposite, they always get bigger with age?
Report Post »hidden_lion
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:50pmThe airborne laser attaches to a 747, how is that not portable enough? The laser was tested from the ground as well by the Israelis. In technology, nothing starts off small.
Report Post »Valkaneer
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:54pm@Ironeagle Not to bright are ya? Every hear of a battel ship? Have you ever seen the USS North Carolina? Ya I bet they couldn’t find any room on the The USS Enterprise or anything like that right?
Report Post »Duey2000
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:59pmActually the potential use for a rail gun is to launch a missile or even nuclear weapon without using a rocket. That is why the force needs to be enough to send the projectile at a high enough velocity. If you don’t use a rocket, it is harder to use a heat seeker to shoot it down meaning that you have a greater chance of it making it’s target. So technically, the finished project would be much larger…
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 7:54amApparently IronEagle wants one NOW that he can strap on with a three point rifle sling. If they keep testing, that might just be feasible in years to come. Computers and cell phones are fine examples of how technology not improves the size, but cost as well.
Report Post »gofigureinternational
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 9:28amOr you put it in space and not worry about moving it. That also eliminates the problem of firing in a straight line with the curvature of the earth. Where is Dr. Evil?
Report Post »TyrannyNoMore
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 5:21pmThe new generation of aircraft carriers are using this technology to launch fighters into the air now, as apposed to the old steam powered catapults. It is also being used in the elevator systems that bring the planes up top from the lower decks.
Report Post »Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:50pmBut you don’t need a rail gun, just sharks, with “LASERS”.
Report Post »Fear The Voices
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:37pm…or at least some ill-tempered bass.
Report Post »Puddle Duck
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 4:29amor a duck with a stern quack.
Report Post »Razorhunters
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:40pmthey were using the blackbird for 15 to 20+ yrs before they rolled it out…
this is fluff.
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:31pmthey roll it out as as a fighter at first ……
Report Post »Razorhunters
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:36pmhave had these for years…
Report Post »look for what they are not showing.
BlackCrow
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:35pmAnd the Iranians think they can take on the U.S. Navy with small arms, speed boats, a handful of destroyers, and a few old Russian diesel subs. Can you say target practice?
Report Post »markthespark
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:43pmPlinking can be soooooo much fun!
Report Post »Patriot of My America
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:00pmYepper it is Live Fire and a Target rich firing range, Called the Middle East…
Report Post »hidden_lion
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 6:52pmUSS Cole was hit with a rowboat
Report Post »Fear The Voices
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:29pmBTW, how is that Iranian Navy doing against the Somali pirates?
Report Post »mlaslavic
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 10:15amYou forget Iran’s best weapon. North Vietnam figured it out and I’m sure Iran has also acquired it. Our Media is potentially their most effective weapon.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:33pmWhere can I get one before Obama gives them to Iran and China…assuming he has not already done so?
Report Post »BlackCrow
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:38pmBAE (the company who is developing this gun) is an English company so let’s hope they have a little better sense.
Report Post »Artreri
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:27pmThe evil monkey in my closet doesn’t stand a chance now!
Report Post »Artreri
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:38pmOh, and that damn hummingbird snoring outside my bedroom window!
Report Post »Fear The Voices
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:31pmHeck with the evil monkey, that idiot kid down the road with the bad speakers and worse taste in music is toast!
Report Post »GO-FOR-LIBERTY
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:26pmOh look Iran. We got another toy to play with, coming at you. Duck real quick.
Report Post »kangaroo
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:20pmYou know Odictator is emailing every one in the world the specs on how to make this right
Report Post »Fear The Voices
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:34pmIf he is doing as well on that as he is with the economy we can all sleep safely.
Report Post »JBaer
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:20pmThat was freaky fast!
Report Post »kangaroo
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:13pmoh this is brilliant, you guys have nothing on wikki leaks, get the info out there good on ya
Report Post »13th Imam
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:24pmIran, China and the Russkies are waiting with baited breath for THE BLAZE to post National Secrets. I‘m sure Barry’s Military Leak Czar has things well in hand. Full of Chinese Campaign Cash.
Report Post »kangaroo
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:33pm13th iman, how do you know what you said isn’t true, stranger than fiction sometimes
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 8:19pm@13th Imam
Report Post »George Soros was a national (White House) secret until Beck let us know about him.
terriergal
Posted on February 29, 2012 at 12:45pm13th Imam, did you notice that the video was declassified by the military and posted by Us Navy Research? i.e. they are way ahead of this one already.
Report Post »jakartaman
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:11pmBig deal – how many rounds per minute – Huh
Report Post »Scooder
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:16pmYou only need ONE!
Report Post »goahead.makemyday
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 8:56amThey will try for 7-10 but really, if something get **** with this they only need one shot. Once they get it small enough and have two or three on ships that one ship could take down an entire task force.
Report Post »KickinBack
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:08pmSomebody’s been playing a little too much Quake…
Report Post »reconmarine
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:07pmLet’s test it out on Iran.
Report Post »Quagaar Warrior
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:04pm~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Report Post »I want a rail Glock.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Razorhunters
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:38pmget the right magnets , coils and processors and build your own…
might look into tesla.
Report Post »BBEV
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:55pmLOL.. Me too
Report Post »stloocardsfan
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 5:03pmNeed one of those for the bed of my pick-up truck.
Report Post »Fear The Voices
Posted on February 28, 2012 at 7:32pmWas thinking the same thing too… Tail gate this!
Report Post »goahead.makemyday
Posted on March 1, 2012 at 8:57amThe new technical. A duallie with a rail gun, that‘s what i’m talking about.
Report Post »