Railguns

[Gunther]

I haven't seen a serious discussion of railguns. Obviously they are an accepted weapons system in CNRP and I am slowly wrapping my head around this concept. I still consider it science fiction, but if everyone has one, I might as well also. During my process of understanding Railguns and what they can do, I have learned that the two limiting factors for their serious application in the real world is power supply and an extremely heat-resistant material to form the rails. Without this substance, the railgun would melt after a small number of firings. Apparently the Community wishes to assume that this material exists and a power supply is in existence to operate these systems.

This essay covers Railgun technology and the materials, design considerations, heat dissipation and my proposal for standardized Railgun specifications. I have seen no mention in factbooks relevant to energy, projectile mass and velocity of railguns; only that they have some mysterious system called "railgun".

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y54aLcC3G74"]Video of Naval Railgun Test Fire[/url]


[size="3"][b]Railguns[/b][/size]

I don't believe Railguns are a practical weapon system that will be operational anytime in the next 10 years. Obviously, I am a minority in this conclusion as they seemingly are an accepted component of CNRP technology. I do however believe that along the lines of any technology as long as it continues to be tested, improved upon and becomes operational will eventually become a realized component/system. Will it be in the 2050s? or 22nd Century? Who knows, but as for now there are no Railguns in existence today currently serving on any Naval vessel anywhere in the world, contrary to popular belief. There are test or developmental models in existence in the US Naval Surface Warfare Center (SNSWC) in Austin, TX and the Defence Research Agency at Dundrennan Range in Kirkcudbright, Scotland.

A railgun consists of two parallel metal rails (hence the name) connected to an electrical power supply. When a conductive projectile is inserted between the rails (at the end connected to the power supply), it completes the circuit. Electrons flow from the negative terminal of the power supply up the negative rail, across the projectile, and down the positive rail, back to the power supply.

This current makes the railgun behave as an electromagnet, creating a powerful magnetic field in the region of the rails up to the position of the projectile. In accordance with the right-hand rule, the magnetic field circulates around each conductor. Since the current is in opposite direction along each rail, the net magnetic field between the rails is directed vertically. In combination with the current across the projectile, this produces a Lorentz force which accelerates the projectile along the rails. There are also forces acting on the rails attempting to push them apart, but since the rails are mounted firmly, they cannot move. The projectile slides up the rails away from the power supply.

A very large power supply providing, on the order of, one million amperes of current will create a tremendous force on the projectile, accelerating it to a speed of many kilometers per second (km/s). Twenty km/s has been achieved with small projectiles explosively injected into the railgun. Although these speeds are possible theoretically, the heat generated from the propulsion of the object is enough to erode the rails rapidly. Such a railgun would require frequent replacement of the rails, or to use a heat resistant material that would be conductive enough to produce the same effect.

[size="3"][b]Materials[/b][/size]

The rails and projectiles must be built from strong conductive materials; the rails need to survive the violence of an accelerating projectile, and heating due to the large currents and friction involved. The recoil force exerted on the rails is equal and opposite to the force propelling the projectile. The seat of the recoil force is still debated. The traditional equations predict that the recoil force acts on the breech of the railgun. Another school of thought invokes Ampère's force law and asserts that it acts along the length of the rails (which is their strongest axis). The rails also repel themselves via a sideways force caused by the rails being pushed by the magnetic field, just as the projectile is. The rails need to survive this without bending, and must be very securely mounted.

[size="3"][b]Design considerations[/b][/size]

The power supply must be able to deliver large currents, sustained and controlled over a useful amount of time. The most important gauge of power supply effectiveness is the energy it can deliver. As of February 2008, the greatest known energy used to propel a projectile from a railgun was 32 million joules. The most common forms of power supplies used in railguns are capacitors and compulsators which are slowly charged from other continuous energy sources.
The rails need to withstand enormous repulsive forces during shooting, and these forces will tend to push them apart and away from the projectile. As rail/projectile clearances increase, arcing develops, which causes rapid vaporization and extensive damage to the rail surfaces and the insulator surfaces. This limited some early research railguns to one shot per service interval.
The inductance and resistance of the rails and power supply limit the efficiency of a railgun design. Currently different rail shapes and railgun configurations are being tested, most notably by the United States Navy, The Institute for Advanced Technology, and BAE Systems.

[size="3"][b]Heat dissipation[/b][/size]

Massive amounts of heat are created by the electricity flowing through the rails, as well as by the friction of the projectile leaving the device. The heat created by this friction itself can cause thermal expansion of the rails and projectile, further increasing the frictional heat. This causes three main problems: melting of equipment, decreased safety of personnel, and detection by enemy forces. As briefly discussed above, the stresses involved in firing this sort of device require an extremely heat-resistant material. Otherwise the rails, barrel, and all equipment attached would melt or be irreparably damaged.

In practice the rails are, with most designs of railgun, subject to erosion due to each launch; and projectiles can be subject to some degree of ablation also, and this can limit railgun life, in some cases severely.

Due to heat dissipation and energy requirements the time between each shot would be significantly less than current HE projectile firing weapons. You would need an increased timespan, just to build up the ## megajoules to get the projectile up to speed. The creation is highly dependent upon locating a source of an extremely heat-resistant material, which does not exist yet. Current test models use existing materials which are inferior and require frequent replacement parts.

Railguns are being researched as weapons with projectiles that do not contain explosives, but are given extremely great velocities: 3,500 m/s (11,500 ft/s, approximately Mach 10 at sea level) or more, which would make their kinetic energy equal or superior to the energy yield of an explosive-filled shell of greater mass. For comparison, the M16 rifle has a muzzle velocity of 930 m/s, or 3,050 ft/s. This would allow more ammunition to be carried and eliminate the hazards of carrying explosives in a tank or naval weapons platform. Also, by firing at greater velocities railguns have greater range, less bullet drop and less wind drift, bypassing the inherent cost and physical limitations of conventional firearms–"the limits of gas expansion prohibit launching an unassisted projectile to velocities greater than about 1.5 km/s and ranges of more than 50 miles [80 km] from a practical conventional gun system."

If it were possible to apply the technology as a rapid-fire automatic weapon, a railgun would have further advantages of increased rate of fire. The feed mechanisms of a conventional firearm must move to accommodate the propellant charge as well as the ammunition round, while a railgun would only need to accommodate the projectile. Furthermore, a railgun would not have to extract a spent cartridge case from the breech; meaning that a fresh round could be cycled almost immediately after the previous round has been shot.

Full-scale models have been built and fired, including a very successful 90 mm bore, 9 MJ kinetic energy gun developed by the US DARPA. Rail and insulator wear problems still need to be solved before railguns can start to replace conventional weapons. Probably the oldest consistently successful system was built by the UK's Defense Research Agency at Dundrennan Range in Kirkcudbright, Scotland. This system has now been operational for over 10 years at an associated flight range for internal, intermediate, external and terminal ballistics, and achieved several mass and velocity records.

The Yugoslavian MTI (MTI - Military - technology institute) developed, within a project named EDO-0, a rail gun with 7 kJ kinetic energy, in 1985. In 1987 a successor was created, project EDO-1, that used projectile with a mass of 0.7 g and achieved speeds of 3,000 m/s, and with a mass of 1.1 g reached speeds of 2,400 m/s. It used a track length of 0.7 m. According to those working on it, with other modifications it was able to achieve a speed of 4,500 m/s. The aim was to achieve projectile speed of 7,000 m/s. At the time, it was considered a military secret.

The United States military is funding railgun experiments. At the University of Texas at Austin Institute for Advanced Technology, military railguns capable of delivering tungsten armor piercing bullets with kinetic energies of nine megajoules have been developed. 9 MJ is enough energy to deliver 2 kg of projectile at 3 km/s–at that velocity a rod of tungsten or another dense metal could easily penetrate a tank, and potentially pass through it.

The United States Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division demonstrated an 8 MJ rail gun firing 3.2 kg projectiles in October 2006 as a prototype of a 64 MJ weapon to be deployed aboard Navy warships. The main problem the Navy has had with implementing a railgun cannon system is that the guns wear out due to the immense heat produced by firing. Such weapons are expected to be powerful enough to do a little more damage than a BGM-109 Tomahawk missile at a fraction of the projectile cost. Since then, BAE Systems has delivered a 32 MJ prototype to the Navy.

On January 31, 2008 the US Navy tested a railgun that fired a shell at 10.64 MJ with a muzzle velocity of 2,520 m/s. Its expected performance is a muzzle velocity over 5,800 m/s, accurate enough to hit a 5 meter target over 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) away while firing at 10 shots per minute. The power was provided by a new 9-megajoule (MJ) prototype capacitor bank using solid-state switches and high-energy-density capacitors delivered in 2007 and an older 32-MJ pulse power system from the US Army’s Green Farm Electric Gun Research and Development Facility developed in the late 1980s that was previously refurbished by General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems (EMS) Division. It is expected to be ready between 2020 to 2025.

[size="3"][b]Weapon specifications for CNRP[/b][/size]

The CNRP community appears to forgo the necesity for an an extremely heat-resistant material and assumes that a higher energy capcity bank supply source will be in existent soon. As long as all are in agreement with this, then it is plausible for high Tech nations to use railgun technology.

Some specifications of energy, projectile mass and velocity should be mentioned in nation's factbooks.

[i][b]An Example:[/b][/i]

These first two are based on the earlier Yugoslavian creations. They require smaller energy supply source and use lighter projectiles. Their range is less than the larger railguns.
[u][b]Yugoslavian EDO-0[/b][/u]
Energy: 7 kJ
Proj Mass: 0.7 g
Velocity: 3,000 m/s
Power Supply: 6kJ Capacitor
Accuracy: 5m target @ 100NM (160km)
RoF: 30 rds/min

[u][b]Yugoslavian EDO-1[/b][/u]
Energy: 7 kJ
Proj Mass: 1.1 g
Velocity: 2,400 m/s
Power Supply: 6kJ Capacitor
Accuracy: 5m target @ 85NM (136km)
RoF: 30 rds/min

These next two are based on recent (within the past 2-5 years) tests with railguns in the US and UK.
[u][b]USNSWC - 90mm[/b][/u]
Energy: 9MJ
Proj Mass: 2 kg
Velocity: 3,000 m/s
Power Supply: 8MJ capacitor bank
Accuracy: 5m target @ 273 NM (440 km)
RoF: 10 rds./Min

[u][b]USNSWC - 120mm[/b][/u]
Energy: 10.54MJ
Proj mass: 3.2 kg
Velocity: 2520 m/s
Power Supply: 9MJ capacitor bank
Accuracy: 5m target @ 230 NM (370 km)
RoF: 10 rds./Min

The last two are creations of my own design expanding on the notion that 32MJ and 64MJ weapons will be successful in the not too distant future.
[u][b]Galileo 32 Railgun[/b][/u]
Energy: 32 MJ
Proj mass: 3 kg
Velocity: 3500 m/s
Power Supply: 25 MJ capacitor bank
Accuracy: 5m target @ 300 NM (482 km)
RoF: 3 rds./Min

[u][b]Galileo 64 Railgun[/b][/u]
Energy: 64 MJ
Proj mass: 5 kg
Velocity: 4000 m/s
Power Supply: 50 MJ capacitor bank
Accuracy: 5m target @ 350 NM (562 km)
RoF: 1 Round/Min

Obviously a smaller round can be used with higher power supplies and energy to create higher ranges.

[Zoot Zoot]

Good read, and a good argument against them.

IN THE RED CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT VERY DETAILED AND PRECISE WALL OF TEXT, FIGHTING OUT OF NORTH AMERICA
IIITTTSSS GUUUUUNNNNNNTHHHHHERRRR!!!!

AND IN THE BLUE CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT SMARTASS LITTLE EVIDENCE OR WIKI COPY PASTING, FIGHTING OUT OF INTERNATIONAL LOCATIONS
IIIIIITTTTSSSSS THE COMMMUNNNIITTTYYY!!!!!


ok guys, I want a clean fight, touch gloves
good


LLLEEETSSS GET REEEADDDY TO RUMMMBBLEEEEEE

[Markus Wilding]

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' date='09 April 2010 - 02:41 PM' timestamp='1270838449' post='2254480']
Good read, and a good argument against them.

IN THE RED CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT VERY DETAILED AND PRECISE WALL OF TEXT, FIGHTING OUT OF NORTH AMERICA
IIITTTSSS GUUUUUNNNNNNTHHHHHERRRR!!!!

AND IN THE BLUE CORNER, WEIGHING IN AT WIKI COPY PASTING, FIGHTING OUT OF HIS DESK,
IIIIIITTTTSSSSS BIOHAZARRRRRRRRRRD!!!!!


ok guys, I want a clean fight, touch gloves
good


LLLEEETSSS GET REEEADDDY TO RUMMMBBLEEEEEE
[/quote]
Fixed it for you.

Edited April 9, 2010 by Markus Wilding

[king of cochin]

The wiki link would have been more sufficient.

As regards the technical challenges of the railguns not having been explained anyone, i show you these links.

[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=67595&view=findpost&p=1962467"]Test Fire[/url]
[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=53974&view=findpost&p=1962485"]Preliminary Design[/url] and further arguments raised.
[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=53974&view=findpost&p=1977598"]Final Design[/url]
[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=53974&view=findpost&p=1992437"]Induction[/url]

Now, a lot of us have already read the wiki article, and we have devised our technologies to counter these problems. I have had numerous discussions regarding these technologies with Lynneth and his suggestions have been invaluable in devising my design. We have calculated the exit velocities, the power throughput required and the power generation required for these weapons. The assumption that we have not taken these into consideration is unwise. I suggest you to read more threads where technologies have been described by RPers, or at least ask people who RP them about their tech basis, before assuming that RPers here have not considered the technological aspects.

Railguns apart, CNRP consists of various high technology, futuristic things which are not built today, including but not limited to Space Elevator, Launch Loop, Commercial Fusion Reactor, Moon Base, Mars Base etc. Many of these are traditions grandfathered over time, some of these are inherent aspects of Cybernations. CNRP, is a Fantasy RP, with a feeble grounding in reality. The tech scale as devised is not limited to present and validated technologies, but future technologies limited by reason.

If you have any challenges to be raised against the technologies I have described, I would enjoy to counter and answer them.

[Centurius]

To be quite honest the tech scale should be changed to allow more futuristic designs rather than limit them

[Biohazard]

I have a question in regarding the rails: Wouldn't it be simpler to create a system that disposes of the rails and installs new ones after a few shots, bypassing the need for a material that can withstand the immense heat and friction?

Basically, you fire it a few times, and after that, the system takes the rails, removes them, and installs a new set, fresh and ready to go.

[Gunther]

[quote name='king of cochin' date='09 April 2010 - 02:51 PM' timestamp='1270839072' post='2254493']
The wiki link would have been more sufficient.

As regards the technical challenges of the railguns not having been explained anyone, i show you these links.

[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=67595&view=findpost&p=1962467"]Test Fire[/url]
[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=53974&view=findpost&p=1962485"]Preliminary Design[/url] and further arguments raised.
[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=53974&view=findpost&p=1977598"]Final Design[/url]
[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=53974&view=findpost&p=1992437"]Induction[/url]

Now, a lot of us have already read the wiki article, and we have devised our technologies to counter these problems. I have had numerous discussions regarding these technologies with Lynneth and his suggestions have been invaluable in devising my design. We have calculated the exit velocities, the power throughput required and the power generation required for these weapons. The assumption that we have not taken these into consideration is unwise. I suggest you to read more threads where technologies have been described by RPers, or at least ask people who RP them about their tech basis, before assuming that RPers here have not considered the technological aspects.

Railguns apart, CNRP consists of various high technology, futuristic things which are not built today, including but not limited to Space Elevator, Launch Loop, Commercial Fusion Reactor, Moon Base, Mars Base etc. Many of these are traditions grandfathered over time, some of these are inherent aspects of Cybernations. CNRP, is a Fantasy RP, with a feeble grounding in reality. The tech scale as devised is not limited to present and validated technologies, but future technologies limited by reason.

If you have any challenges to be raised against the technologies I have described, I would enjoy to counter and answer them.[/quote]

I've moved on from the "Challenging these technologies" phase to the educational phase. Thank you for your input. Obviously I've scratched the surface. My problem is I don't have to the time to read all the threads involved in CNRP. There is no directory leading to all of these RP threads containing the technology you mentioned in your post. There is no way, that I can learn what has been "Grandfathered" and what subjects have not been broached yet unless I post a thread like this one. Any assistance in this regard is greatly appreciated.

Thank you

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Gunther' date='10 April 2010 - 01:02 AM' timestamp='1270841507' post='2254526']
I've moved on from the "Challenging these technologies" phase to the educational phase. Thank you for your input. Obviously I've scratched the surface. My problem is I don't have to the time to read all the threads involved in CNRP. There is no directory leading to all of these RP threads containing the technology you mentioned in your post. There is no way, that I can learn what has been "Grandfathered" and what subjects have not been broached yet unless I post a thread like this one. Any assistance in this regard is greatly appreciated.

Thank you
[/quote]

There is a way by which you or anyone for that matter can learn about these things without starting a proto-confrontational thread - Simply asking around. CNRP is an active and vibrant community, at any time of the day there are several RPers online, PM some of them and they would tell you all the things you want to know, or tell you whom to contact to know these things. Else there is always IRC where you would find many RPers ready to talk and help you with your queries.

It is not wrong to ask questions, but I would take objections to inane thread / arguments based only on Copy/Paste of wiki and making unreasonable assumptions.

As regards a directory, it is simply impossible for any directory as such to be created for CNRP. Such a massive RP'verse with so many story lines going on at the same time, is not easily tabulated.

So in the future if you want to know about these things ask in the existing threads, like OOC, or tech discussions, or better yet, PM or ask another RPer in IRC.

[Gunther]

[quote name='king of cochin' date='09 April 2010 - 03:39 PM' timestamp='1270841929' post='2254537']
There is a way by which you or anyone for that matter can learn about these things without starting a proto-confrontational thread - Simply asking around. CNRP is an active and vibrant community, at any time of the day there are several RPers online, PM some of them and they would tell you all the things you want to know, or tell you whom to contact to know these things. Else there is always IRC where you would find many RPers ready to talk and help you with your queries.

It is not wrong to ask questions, but I would take objections to inane thread / arguments based only on Copy/Paste of wiki and making unreasonable assumptions.

As regards a directory, it is simply impossible for any directory as such to be created for CNRP. Such a massive RP'verse with so many story lines going on at the same time, is not easily tabulated.

So in the future if you want to know about these things ask in the existing threads, like OOC, or tech discussions, or better yet, PM or ask another RPer in IRC.
[/quote]
It only appears confrontational because Zoot Zoot assumed I was attempting to start a fight. I was not. I am however dismayed at the lack of substance in HHAYD's nation factbook. I've been going over it and there are several implausible items there. That alone motivated me to write the thread on the Sci Fi weapons. I'm going over each of HHAYD's "Broken Weapons" and I'll send them to him in a PM. If he doesn't fix them, then I'll post them where everyone can see them. I believe Voodoo Nova has thread on this sort of thing already started.

I don't know who to ask and I've only been writing here for less than 2 months.

Regarding wartime Roleplaying, my experience with Tidy Bowl Man, Executive Minister and SubtleKnifeWielder has been fun. I can't say the same about other aspects.

[iamthey]

Very Nice read Gunther. I found it informative.

[quote name='Centurius' date='09 April 2010 - 07:53 PM' timestamp='1270839167' post='2254494']
To be quite honest the tech scale should be changed to allow more futuristic designs rather than limit them
[/quote]

I would concur with this. The tech scale is somewhat outdated and should probably be pushed forward to correct for (CN wonders) and the fact that we are approaching 2020. I think adjusting it back to a 15 year gap (2025) or even pushing it to 2030 would better fit most of the tech people are using today.

[Executive Minister]

Most railguns in CNRP are either enormous shore installations that have a dedicated facility built around the actual 'gun' or they are ship mounted. An simple explanation would be-

installation houses a powerplant (like one of Lynneth's 1 x 1 x 1 meter reactors) or a connection to the local or dedicated power grid, or they are hooked directly to a ship's reactors/powerplant(s) theres you're energy source.

The rails themselves are either made of unobtainium, or is insinuated that they are exchanged regularly during usage, like the German MG 42.

As for being pseudo-confrontational (my personal hypocrisy aside) I didn't really sense that in the OP. This thing reads more like,

"Well, I really don't think this is right, but If you can't beat em' join em'. Because I haven't seen anything like what I am about to write (which does not imply there is none in existence) here's what I think I know. Help me convince myself so I can join you guys, or give me something to RP about when I make the research and development posts in my factbook."

Edited April 9, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Gunther' date='09 April 2010 - 01:26 PM' timestamp='1270844750' post='2254581']
It only appears confrontational because Zoot Zoot assumed I was attempting to start a fight. I was not. I am however dismayed at the lack of substance in HHAYD's nation factbook. I've been going over it and there are several implausible items there. That alone motivated me to write the thread on the Sci Fi weapons. I'm going over each of HHAYD's "Broken Weapons" and I'll send them to him in a PM. If he doesn't fix them, then I'll post them where everyone can see them. I believe Voodoo Nova has thread on this sort of thing already started.

I don't know who to ask and I've only been writing here for less than 2 months.

Regarding wartime Roleplaying, my experience with Tidy Bowl Man, Executive Minister and SubtleKnifeWielder has been fun. I can't say the same about other aspects.
[/quote]
I'm glad you've enjoyed at least that much.

But trust me. The major players like Lynneth didn't go loltech and say they automatically had them (though he does do that on occasion ). A good number did extensive RP to get around the listed problems. Even I RP'd trouble with the overheating aspect.

[SpacingOutMan]

Erm, what EM? The actual rail guns employed by myself and Lynneth, for instance, are in a sequence of 40, 50, and 60 mm cannon lengths. As for the actual technology, you could [b]build[/b] a rail gun in your garage, though you would need to have the know-how in order to do this. Most, if not all of the materials, required to build a rail gun can be purchased online, though granted the actual cannon material would have to be sturdier than the... I'm not going to explain, so instead, I'll link to the videos.

http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2009/09/diy_garage_railgun.html?CMP=OTC-0D6B48984890

The housing material of the gun itself, in these videos, are garolite.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Rail-Gun/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1q_rRicAwI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y54aLcC3G74

Those last two videos are the declassified videos from the navy test.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/rail-gun1.htm

That link adequately gives a novice's guide to rail guns and electromagnetic projectile weaponry.

[Gunther]

Thank you, Spacing Out Man.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Gunther' date='09 April 2010 - 05:07 PM' timestamp='1270847238' post='2254620']
Thank you, Spacing Out Man.
[/quote]

No problem mate. It took me a while to grasp my head around the concept of coil and rail guns (coil guns are [b]much[/b] easier to manufacture, but aren't nearly as efficient as rail guns). I would suggest, for a contemporary idea about their concept, to find a tutorial like that last link I provided or find one that goes through it step by step.

I would also advise, if it really interests you, looking into the actual physics behind it. You would learn about some of this stuff in any standard physics class in high school, and definitely in college. It's worth looking into and I know that with my background in taking a few physics classes, it helped me understand what a lot of the terms that are associated with the inner-workings of a rail gun. However, you can get a good idea about what they are when you look at the function of the rail gun.

But if you ever have any questions, just feel free to ask (especially if you have, on the off chance, a biology question... I can help! ). Not everyone here in the community will hound you and jump down your throat.

[Gunther]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' date='09 April 2010 - 05:20 PM' timestamp='1270848014' post='2254634']
I would also advise, if it really interests you, looking into the actual physics behind it. You would learn about some of this stuff in any standard physics class in high school, and definitely in college. It's worth looking into and I know that with my background in taking a few physics classes, it helped me understand what a lot of the terms that are associated with the inner-workings of a rail gun. However, you can get a good idea about what they are when you look at the function of the rail gun.

But if you ever have any questions, just feel free to ask (especially if you have, on the off chance, a biology question... I can help! ). Not everyone here in the community will hound you and jump down your throat.[/quote]

As a 45-year old father of 4 small children; one of whom will be born next month, I won't be attending any HS or College courses anytime soon.
If i can't find it on the internet, I probably won't find it. I am a Google master and research things in detail when I'm not changing diapers, giving baths, taking kids to sports classes, school or the park.

My issue is that many of the conventional systems I am quite familiar with having spent half my life in the US Army. All this Sci-Fi Garbage is new territory for me; both frightening and challenging although, the challenging aspect has more to do with managing my time with overactive children and a demanding wife.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Gunther' date='09 April 2010 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1270849087' post='2254646']
As a 45-year old father of 4 small children; one of whom will be born next month, I won't be attending any HS or College courses anytime soon. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif[/img]
If i can't find it on the internet, I probably won't find it. I am a Google master and research things in detail when I'm not changing diapers, giving baths, taking kids to sports classes, school or the park.

My issue is that many of the conventional systems I am quite familiar with having spent half my life in the US Army. All this Sci-Fi Garbage is new territory for me; both frightening and challenging although, the challenging aspect has more to do with managing my time with overactive children and [b]a demanding wife[/b].
[/quote]
Don't let her know you told us that about her.

In any case, my sympathies.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Gunther' date='09 April 2010 - 05:38 PM' timestamp='1270849087' post='2254646']
As a 45-year old father of 4 small children; one of whom will be born next month, I won't be attending any HS or College courses anytime soon.
If i can't find it on the internet, I probably won't find it. I am a Google master and research things in detail when I'm not changing diapers, giving baths, taking kids to sports classes, school or the park.

My issue is that many of the conventional systems I am quite familiar with having spent half my life in the US Army. All this Sci-Fi Garbage is new territory for me; both frightening and challenging although, the challenging aspect has more to do with managing my time with overactive children and a demanding wife.
[/quote]

I figured as much. No one at the college level has a comparable grasp of military tactics as a seasoned veteran of the Army, as I've seen from you. Likewise, in terms of the Sci-Fi mumbo jumbo... the amount of R&D being pumped into new technologies is amazing. They are even implementing a [b]LASER[/b] system in Iraq and Afghanistan. The ZEUS System is an anti-IED system that shoots an IED with a laser from a ZEUS Humvee and causes it to detonate.

It's almost as if the scientific progress initiated by scientists 500 years ago purposely accrued for us to make it into military weapons... for better or for worse.

At any rate, you'll likely here more about it in the near future as the Zumwalt Class Destroyer has more of its specs declassified. Rather recently it was released that not only will it use rail guns, but also FEL anti-missile systems, which is a laser that shoots down incoming anti-ship missiles. The scary thing is, they had a comparable system (THEL) that did the same thing in 2005. The FEL, though, is predicted to be much more accurate.

[Kevin Kingswell]

[quote name='iamthey' date='09 April 2010 - 03:27 PM' timestamp='1270844852' post='2254583']
Very Nice read Gunther. I found it informative.



I would concur with this. The tech scale is somewhat outdated and should probably be pushed forward to correct for (CN wonders) and the fact that we are approaching 2020. I think adjusting it back to a 15 year gap (2025) or even pushing it to 2030 would better fit most of the tech people are using today.
[/quote]

I just want to say that I personally don't think the scale should be moved forward unless you advance the minimum tech scale as well. What I mean is that if you are going to let people have even more advanced tech then those nations unfortunate to not have such high levels of tech should be given a slightly higher tech year to begin with.

An example of this would be say you allowed high tech nations to go upto 2030 then you allowed lower tech nations to have maybe 1990-2000 tech.

I agree that having fancy high tech toys is great fun to RP but it would probally make people feel disheartend if all they had were T-72's vs Hover Raligun tanks*.

Anyway this is just my point of view on the idea of advancing the tech scale.

*By the way this is obviouslly an exaggaration.

[Silhouette]

I don't bother with railguns, since the technology is largely speculative. I have, however, been considering swapping in a nuclear reactor to one of my battleships, and arming it with high power coilguns, which I understand a lot better, and are generally cheaper and easier to manufacture and replace. But that's just me...

[Karl Martin]

I have just one opinion on railguns: Anything that goes beyond those of the planned US Naval railgun, either in speed or power, is utter nonsense. Let's stick to those that are near completion.

[Sargun II]

I have just one opinion on the tech scale overall: pushing it to 2025 or 2030 will lead to a metric !@#$ ton of !@#$%^&* and asshattery. We have enough problems as it is determining what fits in 2020 and even then people still like to push the limit. 2025 or 2030 just adds another layer of !@#$ to wade through and will inevitably lead to massive arguments. Ten years is already a huge window.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Karl Martin' date='09 April 2010 - 10:43 PM' timestamp='1270867396' post='2254984']
I have just one opinion on railguns: Anything that goes beyond those of the planned US Naval railgun, either in speed or power, is utter nonsense. Let's stick to those that are near completion.
[/quote]

Except the planned rail guns aren't even near their potential maxim... perhaps you don't realize this, but the U.S is not the apex of military technology in all regards. Nor has it even come close to optimizing its budget-constrained programs that are rarely ever finished because of immediate and abrupt cut funding.

[Karl Martin]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' date='09 April 2010 - 08:48 PM' timestamp='1270867666' post='2254993']
Except the planned rail guns aren't even near their potential maxim... perhaps you don't realize this, but the U.S is not the apex of military technology in all regards. Nor has it even come close to optimizing its budget-constrained programs that are rarely ever finished because of immediate and abrupt cut funding.
[/quote]

My main point was that instead of making up some uberweapons, we should stick to what we know could happen within our limited knowledge of weaponary. The actual weapon has not come out yet, but with various testings, we know the theory itself is solid enough.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Karl Martin' date='09 April 2010 - 10:54 PM' timestamp='1270868040' post='2255003']
My main point was that instead of making up some uberweapons, we should stick to what we know could happen within our limited knowledge of weaponary. The actual weapon has not come out yet, but with various testings, we know the theory itself is solid enough.
[/quote]

What we do know now is beyond the scope of the proposed weapon being applied by the U.S military. It is viable to procure a system much larger than it, perhaps even more powerful. And the rail gun has been in place since the 1980's... and it was originally conceived for U.S military usage in the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) started some decades ago (1983). Now the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) covers the maintenance of the project.