Rail/coil guns

Discussion in 'Gaming + Technology' started by Taki'Asha, Dec 26, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Taki'Asha

    Taki'Asha Community Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    49
    Just a thread for discussing about these and your opinion on them. Just because the name has 'gun' in the name does not mean I am specifically refering to a weaponized one.

    For any one who does not know;
    A rail gun has two parallel metal rails on each side, and a moving armature in the middle, a electromagnetic wave goes up one rail, moving the armature forward, goes thru the armature, then down the other rail, this throws the projectile in question forward, using kinetic energy to fire.

    A coil gun uses the same electromagnetic concept, but is a barrel with metal coils around it, the electromagnetic wave will be sent down the coils, bringing the projectile with it, eventually ending and the projectile will be sped with kinetic energy, although most of the time they are not as powerful as rail guns.

    Honestly I see how these can be used for space travel, as making a bullet-esc shell that will burst open when its in space and hard enough to withstand the kinetic force of this. The problem would be to make it go in space, the rail length would have to be HUGE (If you have played a good game called SOMA, you would know what I am talking about) in order to get it into space.

    What are your thoughts on this @Roflcopter Rogers and @jeffreythe00 ?
     
    #1
  2. jeffreythe00

    jeffreythe00 Dreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    526
    Railguns are pretty cool. I really don't see many implications for them though as there are already superior alternatives to them at the moment.
     
    #2
  3. Taki'Asha

    Taki'Asha Community Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    49
    What are these superior implications? Not saying that I am disagreeing but just geniunily asking
     
    #3
  4. jeffreythe00

    jeffreythe00 Dreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    526
    While the Navy does have a railgun in its arsenal, missiles seem to be a far superior option for both short, medium and long range.

    Portable railguns are outdone by rifles.

    Space travel by launching a spacecraft into space is kind of pointless if you can't pilot the craft back to earth and because you have such strong magnetic fields, you risk damaging sensitive equipment through magnetic induction. A Faraday cage for all that equipment would be absolutely required.
     
    #4
  5. Roflcopter Rogers

    Roflcopter Rogers Least From The East Platinum VIP

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2015
    Messages:
    719
    Likes Received:
    96
    Still not so sure why with these, it would be a good astronaut weapon along with my laser gun!
     
    #5
  6. jeffreythe00

    jeffreythe00 Dreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    526
    In space where you don't have access to resources to make gun powder, energy weapons would be your best choice because you could recharge them with solar panels (assuming you brought some and have a nearby star to charge off of)
     
    #6
  7. Taki'Asha

    Taki'Asha Community Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    49
    I will agree as rifles will always out do railguns, missiles wastes metal, and things like gun powder and fuel, as apposed to the railgun which uses energy and a metal slug to destroy thing, although it would be more useful for coastal sieges then shooting enemy aircraft down.
    If we can use it for space, then it would be our best bet, as it would just need alot of power, as apposed to what we use now which is large amounts of fuel and fuel tanks, if we use a rail gun then we can cut back on using metal to make rockets and fuel.
     
    #7
  8. jeffreythe00

    jeffreythe00 Dreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    526
    If we're talking about long term cost effectiveness. Railguns win, hands down. However gunpowder is easy enough to make yourself from basic materials. It doesn't even have to beactual gunpowder. It can be any other type of explosive as long as it propels a projectile. Even air works.

    Speaking of fuel, NASA actually uses Hydrogen and Oxygen which is extremely cheap to produce. You can make it yourself with two metal plates, some water and electricity. Cheap as dirt. The "cost" is the huge amount of precision the spacecraft need and the amount of work put in.
     
    #8
  9. Taki'Asha

    Taki'Asha Community Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    49
    Nice to know that they are still finding ways to make cheap fuel that can probably be better.
    I hope in the future that railguns are used for space travel, but cheaper and better fuel will have to do for now.

    The problem with this, its cost effective for FIRING it, you could probably send 2-4 rockets to space for the price it would take to have alot of engineers to make plans, get materials and people to go under water, find a deep enough spot to make this, then get stuff down there, and under water engineering is under the top 10 most dangerous jobs in the world, so this would not be cheap, but effective once we do make it.
     
    #9
  10. jeffreythe00

    jeffreythe00 Dreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    526
    Not only is the fuel mix they're using CHEAP but its also not detrimental to the environment. It effectively turns into water vapor when burned!

    I suppose its possible but there would need to be lots of research done. Like I have mentioned before. Magnetically shielding electrical equipment would be a pretty high priority. G force loads would be another. NASA's current rockets already push the G force boundaries and those rockets accelerate several times slower than what a railgun propulsion would take to get the payload out of the atmosphere. Rocket propulsion is consent throughout the flight whereas once the payload leaves the tracks it will accelerate quite quickly. It would require some pretty amazing architecture to build something tall enough to keep the G forces from killing you.
     
    #10
  11. Taki'Asha

    Taki'Asha Community Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    49
    This would probably not be able to be used for sending people to space sadly, unless we can make something so we don't explode when we launch, it would have to be purely for satellites, since it will give them alot of propulsion any ways.
     
    #11
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.