U.S. Military's Most Powerful Cannon - Electromagnetic Rail-gun Shoots 100 miles - Mach 7

[@ronlal652]

At mach 7 its kinetic energy is unimaginable

[@329787]

Even at mach 7, about 1 mile in 1 sec, firing straight at a target, the projectile would hit 16 feet low. distance = 0.5gt^2 g is the acceleration of gravity and t is time. distance = 0.5*32*(1)^2 = 16 feet. While the projectile is flying nearly horizontal, the 16 foot drop is vertical straight down, perpendicular to the flight vector. With a 100 second flight time for 100 mile range, the drop would be dist = 0.5*32*100^2 = 160000 feet or 30 miles!!! Certainly has to fired ballistically. The projectile will have be aimed ballistically. This video mentions that the projectile will have to be guided and also mentions a proximity fuze will trigger the projectile to explode near the target. This increases the apparent size of the projectile. Also in that one second of flight, the target has moved several thousand feet and therefor must lead the target. My understanding so far this would operate similar to the CIWS Phalanx. Radar in a closed loop feedback system to bring the gun aim point on target. But this projectile is larger and could also be fitted with "on projectile" guidance to be fire and forget. The video mentions @2:39 "out bound projectiles are tracked and guided" so they can hit the incoming target. So instead of a CIWS with a range of 1-2 miles, I'm thinking this would be a CIWS with a range of 100 miles. The army cancelled their long range GPS guided 155mm howizter 155 mm/62 (6.1") Mark 51 Advanced Gun System (AGS). These shells have powder to fire out the cannon, and explosives to destroy the target. This rail gun will have neither powder to fire or explosives to kill. But will kill with kinetic energy but will still need some time of guidance. But these projectiles will be much smaller and with no powder/explosives they are much safer to store on a ship. Also can store thousands of them as apposed to just a few hundred missiles. All the aircraft carriers and large ships we lost in WW2 were lost mostly due to secondary explosions from the artillery shells. I ignored the curvature of the earth. But the firing ballistics and radar guidance would account for that. Although for radar guidance at 100 miles it probably could not be a ship board radar but maybe the E2C hawkeye airborne radar. Also in 100 second flight time the projectile would not quite drop 30 miles but much less. I ignored air resistance and the resulting terminal velocity perpendicular to the flight vector.

[@victorhulbert5687]

So what this soooooo smart clown is saying is that he's the the only one that can figure out the trajectory of the projectile

[@MF11283]

25000 dollars for a steel kinetic round, man I need a government contract

[@richardcarden4161]

Yes it sounds overpriced but I am sure the steel alloy is proprietary and the round is no doubt computer balanced.

[@patton3rd1]

It's guided. Most of the cost will be the electronics that can communicate with guidance systems on ships or aircraft and survive the acceleration it goes through in the gun.

[@MF11283]

@@patton3rd1 there are guidance computers yes. But that projectile is not guided its a kinetic round much like the discarded sabot rounds tanks shoot. If that thing had any electronics In it it would cost a hell of a lot more than 25k

[@wollekemper8317]

What they don’t tell is that the gun literally destroys itself with every shoot you make You might can carry a lot of ammunition , but you can not fire it And the rails are not so easy to replace. This is precision work and you can make one shot for the cameras but then have to fiddle or even replace the rails for hours or for days

[@aft3r-lif382]

True

[@abbiebeast]

When I was a teenager back in the 80's my favorite arcade game - Missile Command!!!

[@BGoff]

Same here

[@americanpatriot7343]

Asteroids

[@garycarraigeacha8794]

yep. strategically painting targets to avoid you destruction. Born out of the Cold War.

[@S58PSHIFTING]

A machine gun version of this would be a blessing. GOD BLESS AMERICA.

[@Dan-zc7ut]

I mean this is a British war weapon, it’s made by british aerodynamical engineering systems for the British Navy and The US navy. The initial research was done in Britain. The USA are just customers

[@charlesnelson8978]

The US Navy is now insisting on including electric systems on all new warships that have multiple times higher output than previous ships. The Navy wants their new ships to have the electrical power required when electromagnet weapons are finally perfected.

[@Padre5623]

And lasers....

[@billyonions6024]

Graphene batteries !

[@alifr4088]

Blasters too!

[@michaelallmon9319]

It is not the size of the projectile it is the speed which causes the damage

[@skyhiker9669]

Well... LET’S GET IT DONE already.

[@rosslynstone]

He is so used to paying very large amounts of money he thinks that small forged bolt is cheap at $25000

[@secondlayer7898]

Anti ship missiles cost 1 milion so comparatively this is cheap

[@grossherman3841]

Another example of British know how.

[@christopherholliday6696]

I'm impressed I think this will be a game changer when to hitting land missile defenses!

[@lckoolg622]

Hell yeah

[@michael_swardh]

It's time to build new battleships with 3x3 Railguns each!

[@BGoff]

That would be awesome.

[@secondlayer7898]

It wouldn't be practical though

[@michaelcuff5780]

All we need is a really long extension cord! Lol!

[@BGoff]

Haha and solar!

[@rizalsfarewelltoourlostede7968]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZqvYZHaNZbachZo CHINA's FUJIAN TERROR MAFIA & China's WITCHCRAFT Historians Get out of our Eden! Stop FUJIAN SCAMMER

[@B0MC3R]

I guess they are going nuclear again.

[@Jdalio5]

$25,000 for machines chunk of medal...that round should cost no more than $100.

[@Mooshimoca]

its not a hunk of metal, the amount of time and money it takes to make that thing as symmetrical as possible, not to mention it has a bunch of shit inside of it so it can detonate right before hitting a missile so the maximum amount of metal can be dispersed to have a greater chance of hitting a missile, some mad technology in that "chunk of medal"

[@loomisdagreat9287]

Mach 7? So it's almost as fast as my '01 Ford Ranger.

[@liberyone5185]

Maybe they can use the "Blitzer" on Walt & CNN.

[@BGoff]

That would be interesting.

[@jimbutke]

Walt Disney?

[@skyhiker9669]

Should be PRIORITY 1 for all branches of the US military.

[@aft3r-lif382]

3 years after your comment.... Saddly it wasn't or at least that's what our Gov wants us to think..... how about some revolutionary way of ALL OF US beautifully created and unique peoples To think, a different mindset where the main goal is how NOT to kill and destroy each other for other people that don't give a shit about us other than cannon fodder.

[@akseakayaker]

This shit is great! We need more of these things.

[@spaceman081447]

@spikedpsycho RE: ". . . and no warhead for taking out a target." It doesn't need one; it's a kinetic kill weapon.

[@spaceman081447]

@spikedpsycho Below are some calculations that I've done . . . m = mass of kinetic kill projectile = 23 lb = 10.43 kg v = velocity of kinetic kill projectile = Mach 7 = 5,329 mph = 2,382 m/s KE = kinetic energy of kinetic kill projectile in joules = to be determined KE = 0.5mv² KE = 0.5(10.43 kg)(2,382 m/s)² KE = 2.96E+07 J For Comparison . . . 4.20E+06 J = energy released by explosion of 1 kilogram of TNT 1.00E+07 J = kinetic energy of the armor-piercing round fired by the assault guns of the ISU-152 tank 2.96E+07 J = kinetic energy of kinetic kill projectile 6.30E+07 J = theoretical minimum energy required to accelerate 1 kg of matter to escape velocity from Earth's surface (ignoring atmosphere) As you can see, the kinetic energy is more than the energy released by explosion of 1 kilogram of TNT. True, that would not disable a ship, but it would knock out a missile or an airplane.

[@spaceman081447]

@spikedpsycho RE: ". . . but you forget the other factor in ballistics, DRAG!" You're right; I didn't take drag into account. And drag would really be significant at the 100+ nautical miles range the Navy is talking about, would it? Maybe I'll re-do the calculations and see what the actual kinetic energy would be at difference ranges.

[@spaceman081447]

@spikedpsycho OK, you've convinced me. And I really appreciate the data references you've given. I try to do the same. That's extremely unusual on KZbin. Most people on YT merely make adamant assertions without any evidence. However, I have two questions. One, if the army had this data, why didn't they give it to the navy - or did the navy just ignore it? I'm well aware of inter-service rivalry, but this is ridiculous! Two, assuming that humans ever establish a permanent presence in space, do you think that railguns would be a viable option for ship-to-ship combat?

[@ReverenXero]

Incorrect. The fireball is actually plasma that gets created when when the atmosphere becomes ionized from the violent release of that much charge at once.

[@thomasbroking7943]

I hope it comes about on time, looks very effective. If the Army can deploy them to protect convoys from air attack that could save many lives.

[@Dawson2011H]

Cool. Finally !

[@owendavies4613]

This looks a little like Star Wars all over again but a more turned down version. I have to say in ideal conditions it might work very well but at sea I think you might have problems. Salt water and electricity don't go well together and you are going to need one hell of a generator to keep up with rapid discharges at on coming targets, but still the technology is impressive.

[@taiyoctopus2958]

Now they need a two stage rail gun projectile... Get that range up over 100 miles. Secondary thrust would be required to counteract air friction after a certain distance no matter how fast your projectile leaves the barrel. Plus a two stage rail projectile might even be able to put small things into orbit for cheaper than a rocket? Adding potential for non military applications.

[@mccari09]

25 grand for 1 round?!? What the actual fuck... it’s probably made with less than 1 thousand

[@yourdrummer2034]

The Navy has ditched the rail gun for hyper sonic missile systems instead.

[@tulsaguy9963]

Wow

[@leepowell4970]

Let's see one operating on a ship ?? , and what have you got to keep the electronics from being targeted, this is one question that hasn't been answered

[@ironwarmonger]

I can see a return to a Battleship type hall with heavily armored turrets for such a reason. See this seams to suggest the age of the Cruiser and Battle ship might return.

[@mccari09]

Pretty sure they would be able to shield the electronics

[@denu1879]

All we need now is a metal gear.

[@MrRedeyedJedi]

Also great for taking out alien ships, when depleted uranium rounds are used

[@keithdouglass3618]

what about the electrical magnetic field neutralizer that nocks out computers

[@idaspudman]

Dang....I'm sure that projectile round is pretty special...but $25,000 each? Holy crap! I must be missing something here. Cool gun never the less!

[@pauljackson2409]

That's what I thought at first, but if you look at the video you'll see that they are not 'dumb' projectiles, but can be guided in-flight and triggered to disintegrate into shrapnel when close to the target.

[@FO_Biggles]

Like Chris Rock's $5000 bullet.

[@ronskancke8166]

Yes 25k seems like a lot of money but is peanuts compared to missiles & smart bombs.

[@charlesoberg5703]

They were promising 40 pound shells at mach nine 15 years ago. What happened to that? 150 miles up into space to come down on a ballistic trajectory 350 miles away, bring the New Jersey and the mighty Mo out of retirement, strip those sixteen inchers off and refit with a few dozen railguns. THINK OF THE MAYHEM, THE MAYHEM!!!

[@crissmullen5528]

Well it's about time Star Wars coughed something up that we can use J/K!!! Unbelievable and very cool Anyone remember the F14 tiger badge or patch? Anytime, baby!!!

[@starrchild512]

Tomcat

[@rickjames7834]

Now you need to build a battle ship.

[@George-nt8uw]

Yeah! I have seen some of your other super guns on ships trying to stop pirates in the Indian Ocean. The only thing they do consistently is miss and that is very short range. Your rail gun that will hit a warhead to destroy it by sheer kinetic energy does not give me that warm fuzzy feeling. Unfortunately, when your new gun fails I may not be able to complain.

[@markwenz5458]

Shoots through 600+ft. of solid earth to do so...

[@johnwolf1475]

What they won't tell you.. made in China, assembled in Mexico and tested IN USA

[@scotttousey227]

That may be an understatement

[@Dan-zc7ut]

Tested in the USA, made by the British aerodynamical engineering systems for the British Navy and The US navy. The initial research was done in Britain. The USA are just customers

[@johnwood1948]

British, built by BAe

[@C99631]

Eliminates propellants! Needs 3 trucks linked together and a command station.

[@GrooberNedJardine]

As long as your electricity works when you need it .

[@samanthalovecock6835]

first thing i thought to

[@johnpainter3426]

Nuke reactors on ships are the usual power source in the navy. Perhaps the army will adopt portable nuke reactors?

[@johnpainter3426]

Albert Moore the military is very much prepared for EMP. Think about the bomber dropping a nuclear bomb. They must be EMP proof to survive dropping the first bomb. In the 1980s I worked on EMP hardened systems. They’re bound to be even better now. One computer system was tested using a 200k volt probe, arcing it to the system backplane. It made it stutter but not fail. Then the put it in a magnetic shielding alloy box that’s a full faraday cage. Optical feed throughs were tested to replace the existing ceramic capacitor feedthroughs. And none of that tech was classified. ‘The good stuff’ must be even better. The railgun itself subjects the round to immense EMF by the nature of how it works.

[@johnpainter3426]

Albert Moore first hand experience. EMP is a civilian problem. It’s costly to comprehensively protect against. I’ve watched EMP testing of a lot of equipment.

[@johnpainter3426]

WinterBornActual the ones I used were on airborne recon systems. But humvee systems are EMP proof. Military aircraft are EMP proof. The weak links are military bases. They have minimal hardening, but they also house hardened equipment. And for places that are carrier port of calls, the carrier can, though it’s unlikely they would, power a small town. They have equipment to do electrical grid tie-ins. The other flight ready systems I got hands on with were computer systems with EMP hardening and spectacularly isolated systems and tolerance to high voltage arcing. A common test was to crack the case, and use a high voltage generator to arc to the buss boards, power supply’s, cpus, etc. stutters in processing were allowed, but crashes or harder failures weren’t permissible. The other end of the spectrum I worked was ... why build to mil spec when we can build and deploy 10s or 100s for the same cost and get even better results. The Vietnam war era ‘fake poo’ sensors were a great example of that to the extreme, and the ‘skeet’ anti-tank weapon on the more practical side.

[@RaniVeluNachar-kx4lu]

I can see the video coming next. Let's compare the 30-06, 300 Win mag, and the Blitzer Rail gun on these 12 gallon jugs of depleted Uranium. Both of the traditional hunting rounds were pretty ineffective, but Blitzer easily penetrated all 12 jugs. Ok you genius White Tail's thinking you can go to depleted Uranium body armor. We got your body armor!

[@keithshackleton3173]

100 miles, 160 kilometers. I will believe it when I see it. Also at that range how does it compensate for the curvature of the earth?

[@michaelkaran7244]

You mean the corialis effect ? There's an app for that ! Lol

[@jmikronis7376]

Can one barrel shoot multiple rounds, or is it one barrel, one shot?

[@lynn69jackson]

This is nothing new. Louis Octave Fauchon-Villeplee patented the rail cannon in 1922.

[@secondlayer7898]

Making this weapon a practical weapon is new

[@sonofaphil]

Problem comes when the barrel after several (5-6) shots starts to melt. Launching a projectile that fast causes a great deal of heat and air friction. Tremendous heat. Materials must still be developed and tested to handle military grade usage. Not quite there yet....

[@joewoodchuck3824]

Faster than a spéeding bullet? It IS a bullet. Apparently it's faster than itself.

[@shanemeyer9224]

I still cant beleive that rail gun projectile cost $25K that I could make on my lathe lol

[@manfredsmith8770]

I wonder how many solar panels would be needed to make this gun Environmental friendly... 😂

[@BGoff]

A bazillion!

[@ricardosantiago7694]

There is no nothing environmental in military stuffs.

[@jackburnett2810]

How does a 20 pound hunk of milled steel cost $25,000?

[@kspicer3132]

maybe its depleted uranium?

[@mikewillis9537]

Because the U.S. is willing to pay that much for it

[@spaceman081447]

@Jack Burnett RE: "How does a 20 pound hunk of milled steel cost $25,000?" I can think of two reasons off the top of my head. (1) It might be made of a particular and specialized alloy. (2) It might require precision machining to very tight tolerances.

[@surgery6862]

Will.this work in an emp environment?

[@BGoff]

Probably not.

[@777Outrigger]

Most US weapons are EMP shielded.

[@williamhoskins7818]

Sure it does..just sign here..

[@whiteclifffl]

Does the projectile in a perfectly straight flight path at Mach 7? If so, how is the curvature of the earth calculated?

[@warvideos2108]

Are you dumb or what, it doesnt fucking matter

[@johnpainter3426]

It’s a conventional ballistic path. So far. So during its flight it’s dropping just like bullets do. Need to go farther raise the barrel.

[@onlythewise1]

so target are twenty miles away

[@805_6HUNNIT]

Good question...in theory it should just fly into “space” right? Unless.....

[@onlythewise1]

@@805_6HUNNIT how about gravity

[@michaelcuff5780]

I need on for home protection! Lol!

[@aft3r-lif382]

5 years later and last I heard China has already fielded it on their naval vessels and USA still has not left the lab with it....

[@KsAdventures]

These are already in use aboard Solar Warden.

[@dirkstarbuck6126]

Great! Now build a system that can track a hypersonic missile and we’re in business!

[@dnkypnch7442]

If they did you think they would tell the public?

[@dirkstarbuck6126]

dnky pnch Yes.Because then China and Russia will know we have it. That’s how we found out they have it; they announced it to their public. It’s called deterrence. This isn’t a poker game where you hold your best card until the end of the game. Hundreds, thousands or perhaps millions of lives depend on it. We don’t want an actual war. So when we have it, we’ll announce it and let them know.

[@dnkypnch7442]

@@dirkstarbuck6126 there's a reason things have top secret clearance. If you really think the u.s military is going to let the world know what they have in their arsenal you're pretty ignorant.

[@dirkstarbuck6126]

It’s true the US has a lot of classified weapons technology. So I’m not ignorant of that. That isn’t what I was talking talking about in general. And that’s not what I was talking about in this specific thread. In answer to your comment, this is what I’m talking about: The US can show a video of a weapons system intercepting a hypersonic missile. That won’t in itself reveal the technology or operational methods used to deploy that system. It will just let people know the US has it. Again, that serves as a deterrent to their adversaries demonstrating that an attack can be countered. It also serves to demonstrate to the American people that the government is ready to meet threats from foreign powers. You see this kind of thing when the US Air Force does elephant walks with their air craft or releases photos of ICBM test launches or when the US Navy sails in large convoys for photos. It’s the same thing. And though you see a photo or video of those things, in no way are their operational or technological capabilities being revealed. But it serves the purposes I mentioned above. So you like to calls names and write with a snarky attitude? Thank you for contributing to trash talking online culture that’s developed over the years. It’s easy when you don’t have to do it face to face. I hope you feel big and important.

[@dnkypnch7442]

@@dirkstarbuck6126 so calling you ignorant is trash talking? Im not being snarky I geniunly think you're ignorant on the subject. Why would the u.s show something like that? Thus letting the enemy know we have something that powerful in our arsenal. Making other countries want to either try to replicate or steal the information on how to create their own. You don't advertise to the world your best weapons. Also yes I do feel big and important

[@vincentprincipato9234]

There goes the S400.

[@analphabet1996]

Good thing is that the S500 is in service next year. So 8643,6kph is real slow. The S500 can engage targets with a speed of 25.000kph. So? Trash that project?

[@publickdefendrr8101]

I thought he was going to say $25 per projectile! No wonder we're so far in debt 🙄

[@publickdefendrr8101]

@J Calhoun Even that is ridiculously expensive.. I've heard from more than one person that if you have a wholesale business and want to sell shit to our Government, then you should at least double your price or the gov will think your product isn't very good! That is totally ass backwards thinking 🙄

[@brake1adam]

Impressive technology... amazing... freedom isn't cheap but it is advanced...

[@timelwood2555]

And when the ships power is killed by a tactical emp it becomes a defenseless sitting duck

[@sluggou812beotch]

Love me some sabots.

[@brent847]

omg those military animations look like they were made in the 70s

[@bustonio]

23 lb projectile (solid throughout) going Mach 7 (over 5000 mph) will not curve to its target 100 miles away. This is a line of sight weapon. 100 miles is 6666 feet of curvature. Anyone going to embarrass themselves and try to explain this one away ?

[@329787]

Yes you are correct. Even at mach 7, about 1 mile in 1 sec, firing straight at a target, the projectile would hit 16 feet low. distance = 0.5gt^2 g is the acceleration of gravity and t is time. distance = 0.5*32*(1)^2 = 16 feet. With a 100 second flight time for 100 mile range, the drop would be dist = 0.5*32*100^2 = 160000 feet or 30 miles!!! Certainly has to fired ballistically. The projectile will have be aimed ballistically. This video mentions that the projectile will have to be guided and also mentions a proximity fuze will trigger the projectile to explode near the target. This increases the apparent size of the projectile. Also in that one second of flight, the target has moved several thousand feet and therefor must lead the target. My understanding so far this would operate similar to the CIWS Phalanx. Radar in a closed loop feedback system to bring the gun aim point on target. But this projectile is larger and could also be fitted with "on projectile" guidance to be fire and forget. The video mentions @2:39 "out bound projectiles are tracked and guided" so they can hit the incoming target. So instead of a CIWS with a range of 1-2 miles, I'm thinking this would be a CIWS with a range of 100 miles. The army cancelled their long range GPS guided 155mm howizter 155 mm/62 (6.1") Mark 51 Advanced Gun System (AGS). These shells have powder to fire out the cannon, and explosives to destroy the target. This rail gun will have neither powder to fire or explosives to kill. But will kill with kinetic energy but will still need some time of guidance. But these projectiles will be much smaller and with no power/explosives they are much safer to store on a ship. All the aircraft carriers and large ships we lost in WW2 were lost mostly due to secondary explosions from the artillery shells.

[@329787]

Adding to my own comment. I ignored the curvature of the earth. But the firing ballistics and radar guidance would account for that. Although for radar guidance at 100 miles it probably could not be a ship board radar but maybe the E2C hawkeye airborne radar. Also in 100 second the projectile would not quite drop 30 miles but much less. I ignored air resistance and the resulting terminal velocity perpendicular to the line of sight.

[@mickeyfilmer5551]

This has already been used against a ufo as captured on film by the space station and widely available. When I can find the link again I will put it up here.

[@bustonio]

What flavor of Kool Aid do you drink ?

[@jessicaharwood9350]

If This is one of the best weapons in the military's Arsenal why are they showing this

[@Rio-by1eh]

Why would anybody want to disclose this technology ?

[@ChildovGhad]

The concept has been known for decades, and anyone with the resources has been working on perfecting it for a long time. It has never been a secret.

[@williamhoskins7818]

SALESMAN!

[@abbiebeast]

Roger that!

[@lakeratatouille]

I thought he was going to say Twenty Five dollars. Lol.

[@yabbadabbadoo8225]

Blitzer , on sale now on Amazon - buy 3 get one free.

[@1206chaos]

Is this the new arrow3 they’ve been working on and tested in Alaska recently for Israel?

[@nimrodquimbus912]

The Arrow 3 or Hetz 3 is an exoatmospheric hypersonic anti-ballistic missile, jointly funded, developed and produced by Israel and the United States. Undertaken by Israel Aerospace Industries and Boeing, it is overseen by the Israeli Ministry of Defense's "Homa" administration and the U.S

[@timothyunderwood7880]

How do you guide a railgun projectile going Mach 7? It's impossible.

[@aft3r-lif382]

Also its barrel is destroyed after 3 shots and has to be replaced so no it's not cheaper at all lol.... so 750,000 for 3 shots if you only count the ammo. If I'm right the barrel is literally 80 percent of the cannon.... so hypersonic missile's are probably the way to go for now at least.

[@huntersafratowich8609]

Looks fun to shoot squirrels with

[@commandlion8667]

So much for Brahmos.

[@bestamerica]

hi C L... ' ha ha... brahmos and bullet round are big different weapons

[@crissmullen5528]

Ok I get the reference Tomcat but did you have a point?

[@ChristianWhiteGuy]

Those 25 pound projectiles cost $25,000.00 dollars. Bullshit!

[@jamesmccluskey1476]

hell of alot of fire from that gun mussle.

[@billdaniels3179]

The only thing is it's electric and enemy has ways to destroy electronics so what happens then if they jam the signal take out the generator is that the end

[@tjstevens001]

Awesome, is it ready to deploy??

[@BGoff]

Let's hope so.

[@JustJimus]

Very cool toy. Impressive firepower. I think the barrel melts after one shot though, lol.

[@barryallender4861]

So when will we see them on our ships and even tanks.

[@michaelosborn3946]

Sorry laser can cut thru stand is more leathle

[@t-rex4211]

I know it’s cheap in comparison but it’s still 25k for a lump of metal with some wings 😂

[@dariusjaeger244]

Advanced containment launcher, barf

[@spaceman081447]

U.S. Military's Most Powerful Cannon - Electromagnetic Rail-gun Shoots 100 miles - Mach 7 m = mass of kinetic kill projectile = 23 lb = 10.43 kg v = velocity of kinetic kill projectile = Mach 7 = 5,329 mph = 2,382 m/s KE = kinetic energy of kinetic kill projectile in joules = to be determined KE = 0.5mv² KE = 0.5(10.43 kg)(2,382 m/s)² KE = 2.96E+07 J For Comparison . . . 4.20E+06 J = energy released by explosion of 1 kilogram of TNT 1.00E+07 J = kinetic energy of the armor-piercing round fired by the assault guns of the ISU-152 tank 2.96E+07 J = kinetic energy of kinetic kill projectile 6.30E+07 J = theoretical minimum energy required to accelerate 1 kg of matter to escape velocity from Earth's surface (ignoring atmosphere)

[@bobbest1611]

the cannon is going to take out a missile? a ship floating on waves is going to accurately shoot the projectile at anything? the power source for the cannon is what? and it's going to sit on a ship? this sounds a lot like the jet planes that can't fly in the rain.

[@paulmicheldenverco1]

I hope the Russians and Chinese do not have the technological capacity to make rail guns of their own. Eventually they will be replaced by laser weapons that fire at the speed of light. If Maach 7 is fast, how about the speed of light? I don't even know the shorthand for that. I wonder if at some point they might have drones with railguns on them and they attack by swarm and automatically find and eliminate targets. Just watching the test fires in slowmo is super cool.

[@noelpaneda4201]

If buy Philippines like that 2 units Destroyer 2 units frigates ship power cannon eleromagnetic rail gun no one can bully again Philippines..

[@nunyanunya7788]

Badass 🦅🇺🇸🦅

[@Dan-zc7ut]

it’s made by british aerodynamical engineering systems for the British Navy and The US navy. The initial research was done in Britain. The USA are just customers. Lol

[@daniolam8113]

The mobile version is too bog once assembled with 3 vehicles ( easy to spot and target),

[@andrewglennon9760]

Emp safe?

[@tomlame4371]

Yeah wish I had 25,000 just to throw out the winder

[@George-nt8uw]

And by the way, The enemy will use an even lower tech way of defeating this gun. One of their plants who we stupidly allow to serve on our vessel (PC) will pull the plug permanently.

[@christopherholliday6696]

I don't think so because it going to take the adversary and long time how to figure out how to defend against something like this !

[@leoli2450]

Hanate kokoro ni kizanda yume wo...

[@philipraymond6816]

Overcoming internal G-Force problems with internal Electronics that goes from zero to mock 7 in a nanosecond will be a major problem

[@alanheath7056]

A missile does course correction and believe would miss. Thoe would be good on a Low Orbit drone bomber.

[@kirksmith5954]

25000 is alot of money for a machined piece of metal

[@jeffbanner4580]

sure theres more to it then that

[@danieljaeger6712]

☺nice

[@bestamerica]

' do this bullet round have a high powerful TNT powder inside... can destroy enemy ship / tank / missile / rocket / plane

[@vincentprincipato9234]

There goes Chicom islands