Slashdot Mirror
The US Navy Wants More Railguns and Lasers, Less Gunpowder
coondoggie writes Speaking before nearly 3,000 attendees at the Naval Future Force Science and Technology EXPO in Washington, D.C., Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert charged his audience to reduce reliance on gunpowder in a wide-ranging speech on the future technological needs of the Navy. "Number one, you've got to get us off gunpowder," said Greenert, noting that Office of Naval Research-supported weapon programs like Laser Weapon System (LaWS) and the electromagnetic railgun are vital to the future force. “Probably the biggest vulnerability of a ship is its magazine—because that’s where all the explosives are." Weapons like LaWS have a virtually unlimited magazine, only constrained by power and cooling capabilities aboard the vessel carrying them. In addition, Greenert noted the added safety for Sailors and Marines that will come from reducing dependency on gunpowder-based munitions.
You do not understand diplomacy. It is not about winning it is about balance of power. A trade agreement which is favor of, lets say, the US and the other side must pay, then this will result sooner or later in less respect for the US. In the end they hate the US for being rude and brutal even without weapons. However, this is the diplomacy the US normally does. And often it is not only not in the interest of the other nation, it is also not in the interest of the general population in the US.
All would be much better when the US would be able to learn to be less imperial. And yes, the Chinese try to be the same. That will also not help to have stable world politics.
Well, no. Railguns, like conventional cannon, fire a projectile that obeys the law of gravity. Which means the trajectory is parabolic for those who are exceptionally dense.
So, yes, railguns can hit targets over the horizon.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
For steel walls 5km away you've got railguns.
The laser is for 1/2" of aluminum flying at mach 3 in your general direction..
Yep, the exact same arguments were being made about the F-22 and Eurofighter. "Why do we need these high tech planes when all we're doing is bombing mud huts in Afghanistan?".
Those planes look like kind of a good idea now we have Russia flying within miles and sometimes literally outright breaching sovereign NATO airspace again with it's probing patrols in the Baltic, the North Sea, and English channel and with transponders off and no response to communications. We're also finding those mud huts are right in the middle of a high tech Syrian air defence network too.
So it's kind of a good thing we didn't listen to the naysayers and did decide to keep up with our 4.5th gen and 5th gen fighter programs after all.
Some people don't understand that you have a military that's prepared for what might happen, not what is happening or has happened in the past.