Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 277 posts

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#21

Post by Waterluvian »

alistproducer2 wrote: post #10

Am I supposed to celebrate the spending of untold billions on an unnecessary weapon of death while my Bridges and roads crumble, my health care system sucks and absolutely nothing is being done about, or to prepare for, climate change?? I'm not impressed

The absolute dumbest thing about not spending on infrastructure is that it has colossal potential to invigorate any local economy. Huge amounts of labor and materials needed. And usually you're not shipping massive amounts of aggregate across country, it's from nearby quarries. And you're definitely not watching the money disappear overseas.

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#22

Post by clarkmoody »

sdinsn wrote: post #14
tick_tock_tick wrote: post #3

Does the logo the navy use for railguns show it shooting intercontinental?

It's just a logo, I think the Railgun only can get to 100 miles or so (at the moment).

Someone a little better with aerodynamic drag computations could do a quick back-of-the-napkin to figure out the maximum range of something fired at sea-level going Mach 3,4,5,6,etc. The biggest issue I see is just vaporizing the projectile on launch, so there would be an upper bound on muzzle velocity based on projectile material properties.

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#23

Post by simonh »

bananocurrency wrote: post #5
99052882514569 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, are you drawing a parallel between a rail gun and gas chambers?

Sorry, are you implying that a rail gun is that much more humane?

The railgun is a precise weapon that strikes specific targets and so the users of it can exercise reasonable judgement on it's use. It's a requirement of various treaties on warfare, such as the Geneva Convention, that war fighters be accountable for their actions and not engage targets under specific circumstances, such as if they are civilians or surrendering.

Gas is an extremely unreliable and indiscriminate weapon that is highly likely to affect individuals beyond any reasonably intended target, including civilians. It's not possible to use it and still meet obligations under treaty, such as not engaging civilians and surrendering troops. Therefore it's use is not allowed and any use of it is accountable as a war crime.

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#24

Post by clarkmoody »

travisporter wrote: post #9

Is there any active research on this technology for non-rocket launch systems?

I assume that the same technology could be applied for launch systems, with one major change: maximum acceleration. An electric railgun would need to be very long in order to reach high velocity without undergoing huge accelerations as in the Navy railgun. Ramping up a vehicle with payload and fuel in it without destroying it is the name of the game.

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#25

Post by Tuna-Fish »

deweller wrote: post #16
alistproducer2 wrote: post #10

Am I supposed to celebrate the spending of untold billions on an unnecessary weapon of death while my Bridges and roads crumble, my health care system sucks and absolutely nothing is being done about, or to prepare for, climate change?? I'm not impressed

Is there a widespread lack of funding for bridges and roads infrastructure in the US? The bridges and roads around me in middle TN are well maintained. These are funded by local government resources, right?

The reason there were such problems in this area until recently was congressional earmarks.

When people lobbied for their representatives to support their pet cause, traditionally the best way they had to do this was to issue an earmark as part of some bill. Earmarks are not heavily fought by other representative because they do not give federal money to a state, rather they are the federal government forcing a state to spend some of their own money on something they wouldn't otherwise have done. The problem with this is that unless the local government decides to overbudget for this and run a surplus every year, this money comes from somewhere. Typically something boring that people don't care about, like infrastructure maintenance. That is, people don't care about it until it starts to actually fail...

Then congressional earmarks got banned. Only, things are actually worse now, because it turns out the political horse trading around earmarks was the only reason representatives have to compromise across party lines, instead of always holding a hard line on the issues their supporters want. This is the direct cause of the current political gridlock.

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#26

Post by Someone1234 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #21
alistproducer2 wrote: post #10

Am I supposed to celebrate the spending of untold billions on an unnecessary weapon of death while my Bridges and roads crumble, my health care system sucks and absolutely nothing is being done about, or to prepare for, climate change?? I'm not impressed

The absolute dumbest thing about not spending on infrastructure is that it has colossal potential to invigorate any local economy. Huge amounts of labor and materials needed. And usually you're not shipping massive amounts of aggregate across country, it's from nearby quarries. And you're definitely not watching the money disappear overseas.

Plus doesn't infrastructure spending normally result in higher returns than it costs?

> A recent Business Roundtable study found that $737 billion in public investment over 10 years would set us on the path toward reviving our national infrastructure. While those numbers seem daunting, the report also showed that every additional dollar invested in infrastructure delivers roughly $3.70 in additional economic growth over a period of 20 years.

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/433538-infr...

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#27

Post by godelski »

sdinsn wrote: post #18
bananocurrency wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, are you implying that a rail gun is that much more humane?

It sure is. Are you implying that a railgun is equally or less humane as chemical weapons?

Are you implying that even if you don't think killing people that certain ways of killing people is definitely worse than others?

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#28

Post by ch4s3 »

doctorRetro wrote: post #12
spookybones wrote: post #2

As usual, I find the music in all of the linked videos delusional, as if this high-tech killing machine was created to astonish patriotic five-year-olds. For the sake of analogy, someone should overlay the same music to the engineering of a-bombs and gas chambers.

I agree on at least the first half of your statement. Although I'm not sure I'd say 'delusional' as much as - I don't know? - Jingoistic? Bombastic? I feel like I should be playing Command and Conquer to that sound track. At the end of the day, these are killing machines that are being designed to take human lives, and it does feel more than a bit inappropriate. I think that's what you're getting at with the latter h…

Jingoistic is exactly the word that came to mind as I watched the video.

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#29

Post by godelski »

simonh wrote: post #23
bananocurrency wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, are you implying that a rail gun is that much more humane?

The railgun is a precise weapon that strikes specific targets and so the users of it can exercise reasonable judgement on it's use. It's a requirement of various treaties on warfare, such as the Geneva Convention, that war fighters be accountable for their actions and not engage targets under specific circumstances, such as if they are civilians or surrendering. Gas is an extremely unreliable and indiscriminate weapo…

Gas also tends to be a more painful and gruesome death. We humans tend to prefer quick and painless deaths, even when it is against our enemies.

Re: US Navy's Railgun Now Undergoing Tests in New Mexico

#30

Post by Rebelgecko »

arch-ninja wrote: post #15
spookybones wrote: post #2

As usual, I find the music in all of the linked videos delusional, as if this high-tech killing machine was created to astonish patriotic five-year-olds. For the sake of analogy, someone should overlay the same music to the engineering of a-bombs and gas chambers.

Sounds like they paid a highschool student to play a muted version of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRh-dzrI4Z4

Hans Zimmer recycles that riff all the time (I think he used it first in Drop Zone, then Crimson Tide, The Rock, Gladiator, and probably elsewhere). I guess the Navy wanted to give it a shot too.
Post reply on HN