/k/ - Weapons

>>569549

>US Army wants to field 100km cannons and 500km missiles

The US Army has wanted to do a lot of shit, most of it fucking stupid.

>>569560

Come on it can't be dumber than a railgun, laser, and that f-35 thing. In fact navy and air force likely have them beat for wasteful spending and dumb ideas.

>>569592

Bull tried to sell the design in the west, no one wanted it. When he decided to use a gullible dictator to put humanity into space… the kikes killed him.

>>569560

Yeah, but all the memebux are thrown into the yawning, endless pits that are the USAF & USN budgets, so none of this shit will ever happen.

>>569588

Railguns and lasers are useful though.

>>569626

>>569603

They're useful just not on earth.

>>569588

>railgun, laser

So what? They look cool.

>>569647

>Why can't our government realize that adding tech to boolits just makes more expensive. Don't fix what ain't broken..

But anon, if we don't continue to break things that work perfectly fine, how will Lockheed and GD get their billions in gibs?

>>569682

>railgun accelerator

Something tells me fuckhueg magnetic fields would have the potential to interfere with any sensitive electronics or bodies within the payload.

>>569686

The bottom left image in the 3rd image is the electromagnetic launching system that will be used on the ford carriers, the top right image was a prototype nasa developed to launch space craft.

Compare the cross section of the two accelerators. It's pretty uncanny.

>>569686

Which is fine and dandy until Ivan decides to hit the CSG with some Scalar Weaponry and laughs as he deploys MiG-29s from the Kuznetsov to go carrier hunting.

>>569688

Nevermind me, I replied without taking a proper look at the whole picture. I saw the diagram in the upper left of the third image and assumed NASA's plan was to apply intense magnetic forces to the spacecraft itself and not rails underneath the spacecraft.

>>569716

Nigger what? I assume you meant to reply to someone else, because I didn't say shit about the extreme fragility of carrier groups.

>>569626

>this station would cost $1.5 million to construct

Source? That seems unreasonably cheap. In the age of slashed budgets there's literally (as in literally rather than figuratively) no reason not to use this. I watched the resupply launch last night, and as much of a fist pump moment as it was to see the rocket accelerate away they could get a lot more shit up to the ISS a lot cheaper with a Bull cannon, enough shit to turn it into the first orbital shipyard even.

>>569635

The space /k/olonisation thread went through this in some detail, a Gamma wave laser would be a god tier in space, but normal wavelengths would need much more weapon and a much wider aperture to preform either half as well.

>>569747

Sorry my bad, I confused it with Bulls original design (in a mountain). The Quicklaunch station would cost $500 million for a few dozen of them, still a bargain imo compared to Shuttle program.

The reason why it doesn't exist is everyone is scared of it because it would give dictators cheap intercontinental delivery systems for cheap bio or chem warheads. Quicklaunch itself was shut down by governments.

What will happen to the Burger army when they run out of money?

>>569770

1:10 to 1:15 he says 4 million pounds a year capacity.

Meaning that in 3 years we could send a permanent colony of 400 people to Mars.

160 people is the minimum needed to have a stable population without inbreeding (minimum viable population). We could literally start colonizing space with just one of these guns.

>>569802

You still have to send the people up in rockets though, putting a person in one of these would turn them into paste.

>>569682

Why does it say "Evacuated launch tube?" How the fuck would you make the launch tube a vacuum and still get the craft out one end? In fact why the fuck would it even need to be in a vacuum, air resistance is a solved problem in rocketry, we deal with it just fine every time we launch a rocket.

>>569819

I don't know what's more shameful, that you saved that pic or that I know exactly what website and article it came from.

>>569836

I don't think there's much shame involved on either side there. It's only sensible to know what the enemy is thinking and why, and every now and then they make a pic that can be put to better use than they originally planned.

>>569808

I don't believe it, it would have to be a like 100 mile long linear accelerator. You can't have a circular accelerator because you'd have to spin people around at thousands of miles per hour. To make this work you have to accelerate to a much higher velocity than you would need with rockets over a much longer distance.

SSTO spaceplanes are fine though.

>>569820

Evacuated doesn't mean vacuum, it just means lowered air resistance. Otherwise it would cause a subway effect, where a "plug" of air in front of the craft in the tube would be compressed and cause serious friction.

>>569847

We have longer maglev train tracks.

>>569549

US Army wants shit because Airforce and Navy aren't backing them up properly? Not that big of a surprise, really.

>>569596

Typically missiles, tanks, and self-propelled artillery have an internal $10,000 fiberoptic gyroscope inside of them that allow them to hit accurately within about 10 meters of the target (at which point the impact will cause damage even if it's not a direct hit). Even if it's GPS guided only (it's not), once it's on the descent, the gyroscope kicks in and it's self-guided/not gonna miss its target unless said target moves really fucking fast.

>>569679

Kind of. It's about making it achieve the proper trajectory so that it continuously falls towards the center of the Earth. That's not a matter of speed, that's a matter of angle and distance from the Earth to achieve this rate of falling. "Speed" gets you there, but "speed" will also slingshot you out of orbit at even faster rates if you fuck it up.

>>569647

>Why can't our government realize that adding tech to boolits just makes more expensive. Don't fix what ain't broken..

The US Army doesn't give a shit about expenses; it's the taxpayers' money, not theirs. Procurement officers are more concerned about earning a "consulting" job at Raytheon and Orbital ATK than efficient armaments during peacetime or "wars" on goat farmers.

>>570819

>Typically missiles, tanks, and self-propelled artillery have an internal $10,000 fiberoptic gyroscope inside of them that allow them to hit accurately within about 10 meters of the target (at which point the impact will cause damage even if it's not a direct hit). Even if it's GPS guided only (it's not), once it's on the descent, the gyroscope kicks in and it's self-guided/not gonna miss its target unless said target moves really fucking fast.

No. Missiles generally utilize TERCOM as a secondary to GPS, not INS. Armor is equipped with an FCS, GPS is only used for navigation, not munitions, even a shell like the M943 STAFF uses a FSMWS. Arty is "GPS-assisted", it is still common practice to configured a firing solution using provided short-line grid coordinate (via MGRS or Lat/Long) an azimuth, and an approximate distance.

>>571301

Northrop Grumman engineers who build them for a living told me otherwise.

>>571301

TERCOM isnt common dude…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TERCOM#Missiles_that_employ_TERCOM_navigation

>>571306

>Northrop Grumman

>build

You mean designed? I'd also question the suppose engineers that told you INS was present in tanks or a SPG.

>>571309

It is for the types of missiles being discussed. Unless it's an BM (or cruise missile) it's going to rely on visual tracking such as IR or radar.

>>571467

It's an upgrade on MGM-140 from 300 to <500km, in other words a tactical ballistic missile. It won't be using TERCOM, in fact it uses precisely a INS guidance thats assisted by GPS sometimes to improve accuracy.

Essentially the army wants the ability to take out an enemy airfield or other high value target without calling in the air force which keeps screening the calls, and because the air force are a bunch of faggots that limit army effectiveness with key west.

>>571469

>It's an upgrade on MGM-140 from 300 to <500km, in other words a tactical ballistic missile.

Wow, it's as if I'd made that exact point;

>Unless it's an BM (or cruise missile) it's going to rely on visual tracking such as IR or radar.

>It won't be using TERCOM, in fact it uses precisely a INS guidance thats assisted by GPS sometimes to improve accuracy.

No shit, sherlock. I was, from the beginning, speaking of missile platforms >>571301 was claiming had an INS on board when they have TERCOM. Platforms like BM's use INS because they're area weapon, they have a large CEP, they don't require the accuracy a precision system does. If you'd stop to read and comprehend, >>570819 is talking about missile systems with an extremely small CEP, 32ft (10m). The MGM-140A Block I, MGM-140B Block IA, and MGM-168 Block IVA are all sub-munition dispersal systems, aka "area weapons". The MGM-140E unitary HE warhead was shitcanned, which makes sense because HE has poor area affect qualities and it's pointless to have a unitary HE warhead with the mission of minimizing collateral and attacking critical target points on a non-precision delivery platform, coupled with the removal of sub-munition systems from inventory by 2018, thus the Army's initial intention of replacing all it's current ATACMS with LRPF/DeepStrike Program, which is still a TBM, but with extended range.