It’s Not Like We’re In Two Resource-Intensive Ground Wars Where Economy of Force is Crucial or Anything

By Spencer Ackerman 1/29/08 3:57 PM

<p>Iraq. Afghanistan. And then, the Navy. From the <a title="Pentagon public affairs shop" id="rn26" href="http://www.defenselink.mil/advisories/advisory.aspx?advisoryid=2941">Pentagon public affairs shop</a> today:</p>

<div>

<div><blockquote>The Office of Naval Research will test fire an electromagnetic railgun (EMRG) at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, Va. on Jan. 31, 2008, between 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. EST. The gun will be fired at over 10 megajoules of energy

Print

trevor

My mistake. Briefing [pdf] from the Navy's website reports that 8 megajoules is the state of the art, and they're aiming for 32 and then 64. (see slide 6).

So, they're going for eight times what they can do today, not just double. No opinion on whether that's a good idea, efficient use of resources, etc.

trevor

Via Slashdot, from a Popular Mechanics article:
Which is why the news that BAE Systems has delivered a functional, 32-megajoule Electro-Magnetic Laboratory Rail Gun (32-MJ LRG) to the U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren, Va., is exciting. Installation of the laboratory launcher is currently under way, and according to BAE, this is the first step toward the Navy's goal of developing a tactical 64-megajoule ship-mounted weapon. [emphasis added]

msobel

But we have to have these kind of naval rifles. the limitations of physics on the size of the explosive propellant rifles put our entire battleship fleet at risk. Only with these kind of 21st weapons can we sail triumphantly across the Pacific to defeat the Imperial Eurasian Navy in a grand decisive battle.

boudin

At least two British based international corporations are involved in the development of this weapon. One is BAE Systems and the other is QinetiQ. The latter's Board of Directors includes George Tenet as Non-executive Director.
http://www.qinetiq.com/home/aboutqq/board_of_di...
http://www.baesystems.com/index.htm

jkramerd

To be fair, the electromagnetic railgun has a pretty substantial set of non-military potential uses - get the energy high enough and it can become a much more efficient way of lobbing things into orbit than solid-fuel boosters.

lorayneapojoynt

Who's got the contract for this weapon? General Electric? /snark

But seriously...which Bushie donor is trying to finish delivery before the end of the administation? I'm afraid to peek through a .mil domain to find out.

lukeness

See this article in Popular Science (http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2004-06/e...) from June 2004 for a description. It's a replacement, in a sense, for ship-borne cruise missiles. Terribly destructive, I assume.

spencer_ackerman

'splain, please.

trevor

My understanding is that 10 megajoules is only a milestone, and what they're really after is double that.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Blog, National Security, U.S.,

It’s Not Like We’re In Two Resource-Intensive Ground Wars Where Economy of Force is Crucial or Anything

CATEGORIES AND TAGS IN THIS STORY:

Related Posts

Latest Posts