The Turkish military bravo reported on the tests of their Şahi 209 Block II railgun. Congratulate, or …? Probably all the same "or".
It is clear that the weapons internet was seething, massively reprinting photographs and a video filmed by the Turkish military, but I think one should not make premature conclusions and enroll Turkey in the "railgun club" ahead of time, as some media rushed to do.
The cannon, let's face it, is the most modest. Its caliber is 35 mm. Projectile weight - 1 kg.
"At the same time, the electromagnetic pulse is enough to effectively hit the target at a distance of up to 50 km."
“Up to 50 km” is both 1 km and 10. I cannot say who and how “effectively” a kilogram ball can hit at a distance of up to 50 km. And how accurately it will fly.
In general, the experiment was conducted with a claim of success. Like they shot, and more than once. How about showing where and how they got - of course, silence, for a military secret.
By the way, I would like to praise how the Turkish operators showed everything. With a certain hint that the gun is mobile, unlike, say, the American monster. Wheeled chassis, all the cases …
But here is another photo, not cropped. And it is clear and understandable that the "battery" of the installation is more than modest.
For comparison, it is worth seeing how the Americans have equipped the railgun business.
It is noticeable that among the Americans the "battery" business is arranged much more massively. True, the Americans and the projectile weigh 16 kg versus 1, and the caliber is not toy 35 mm, but quite normal marine 127 mm.
But to what extent is it worth seriously considering the railgun as a weapon in general today?
Many smart people have come to the conclusion that it is not worth it. And the arguments are embedded directly in the design of the railgun.
Here it is worth considering the very principle of operation of this miracle weapon. Physics of the purest water. I will not go into details, they are easy to find, and so, two elements. The power supply, which I called a battery (in fact, it is a capacitor) and a launcher. PU, roughly speaking, consists of two parallel conductors, which is why they called it a railgun.
A powerful current pulse is applied to the rail conductors. Something like a short circuit occurs, as in welding, and a plasma arc ignites between the rail electrodes.
A current begins to flow through the plasma, from one electrode to another. The current causes the emergence of a powerful electromagnetic field, which will affect the entire device.
Since the rails are rigidly fixed in the barrel, then this is what happens next: the Lorentz force begins to work, which begins to move the charged particles by the electromagnetic field. That is, plasma. Since plasma in our case is the only thing that can be moved.
The Lorentz force is not aware of the existence of Newton's Third Law, so the motion will occur with tremendous acceleration. And the plasma begins to move along the channel (so to speak) of the trunk.
This clot of plasma is also rightly called a "plasma piston", it is, as it were, an analogue of a powder charge in a firearm. Yes, an ordinary projectile would simply evaporate when exposed to such forces. Therefore, the shells of the railgun are ordinary blanks of a very refractory material, which are designed to destroy targets exclusively due to the accumulated kinetic energy.
Although yes, they accumulate this energy - be healthy.
In addition, there is an analogue of an artillery wad - a metal gasket between the plasma and the projectile. It does not allow the projectile to evaporate prematurely, and itself, evaporating under the influence of temperature, becomes a recharge for the plasma.
In general, many experts believe that the railgun is itself a weapon without a blank, because it is capable of spitting out such clots of plasma, accelerated to a tremendous speed - up to 50 km / sec.
And so the speed of the projectile at the exit can be up to 15 km / s. Gunpowder artillery shell can give a maximum speed of 2 km / s.
But again, we forget about high-explosive, high-explosive fragmentation, cluster, shrapnel and other shells, because the lot of the railgun is a blank, accelerated to great speed.
We figured out the device, let's talk about the application.
With combat use, we admit right away, not very much. But first, let's look at the merits that the Americans famously described in their time.
1. Huge projectile speed. In combat conditions up to 10 km / sec. It is possible and more, but there is no sense, no one canceled the air and friction against it, so that the projectile will be slowed down by the friction force. Plus overheating.
2. Penetration power. Yes, due to the speed, a carbide projectile will penetrate any armor, that's a fact. And it is quite possible that even active protection will not save, since the explosive in its composition simply will not have time to explode.
3. Long range of a direct shot. It can be 8-9 km, and the projectile travels this distance in less than a second. This is impressive, since it is unrealistic even for an aircraft to dodge such a blow. It's sad to even think about a tank.
In addition, it seems to me that it will be very easy for the railgun to aim. Even when shooting at long distances. And at close range (this is 3-8 km), and in general, you will not have to bother yourself with such things as anticipation and correction for the wind, for example. Loop it as it is, you won't miss. The speed of the projectile will do its job.
4. Range of fire. Experts again believe that the railgun projectile can be effectively used at a distance of up to 300 km. On the one hand, it seems to be a competitor for missiles, on the other hand, it is a point-of-use tool and the railgun shell is not able to smash the area to shreds.
5. Cheapness and simplicity of ammunition. Yes, a tungsten shell in an aluminum capsule is not very expensive. And there is no need for explosives inside, firstly, it will not survive at the start, and secondly, a projectile accelerated to such a speed, when it hits something, will hit something and so will not seem a little. Perhaps more effective than any explosive. But the cheapness of the shells and the ease of storage are easily offset by the cost of the railgun itself.
What about the disadvantages? We can say about the disadvantages that they, for a clear advantage, overcome the advantages.
1. Power supplies. This is a sore spot, because the railgun feels best near the power plant. The capacitor batteries that organize the shot must be charged with something. Considering the capacity of existing installations, and this is "only" 25 MW, then we are not talking about mobile power plants at all, but in fact only some fortified areas on land are drawn, or the protection of stationary objects as air defense. Nearby, I emphasize, with the power plant.
Or we see a ship of a class from a destroyer and higher, but in general it is desirable with a nuclear reactor.
2. Cost. Here it is worth noting about the cost of the ammunition, but about the cost of the barrel. It is clear that exposure to plasma practically destroys the barrel. A thousand shots is still the ultimate dream. But the cost of one shot, taking into account the cost of barrel wear, according to some sources, is about $ 25,000. Let's just say, not a little, even taking into account the possibility of destroying more expensive equipment such as a tank or an aircraft with one shot.
3. Disguise. Everything is so sad here that I will say briefly: this thing unmasks itself with the very first shot so that an advanced enemy can only send cruise missile heels towards the source of EMP indignations. It works, who does not believe - ask Dudaev. There, a rocket flew to the phone, but here …
By the way, and without EMP, sound effects are also nothing. Heated plasma, when it bursts out of the barrel, what does it do? That's right, it is expanding. And the roar at the same time is quite enough.
In general, so far this cannot be considered a weapon. Even being so optimistic. Yes, railguns exist as experimental models and do not just exist, but are developing. But it's not worth talking about real combat use yet, as well as making any bet on this type of weapon.
Example? Yes, here it is, "Zamvolt". It was for use on this ship that the railgun was planned. The power plant of the destroyer allows it. But then what is the essence of the stealth or stealth of a destroyer, if after the first shot it will be on all radar screens? And then the only question is how quickly the opponents will react to this shot.
A railgun on a Ford-class aircraft carrier? Well, yes, it will probably be more appropriate. But is it necessary? A miracle cannon that shoots miracle projectiles at 300 or 400 km (we are not even talking about accuracy and the ability to miss), perhaps, would be in place. If the strike group did not have 50 F / A-18E / F Super Hornet fighter-bombers, each of which is capable of moving 8 tons of various ammunition over 2,000 km and using them. But with airplanes, the idea looks frankly not very good.
If we talk about a land railgun, then everything is even more sad here. The first unmasking shot may turn out to be the last, because the enemy does not need to shoot at the railgun. It is enough to hit the power plant that feeds it, and the effect will generally be excellent: the railgun does not fire, and the whole area is de-energized.
It turns out that if the sea-based railgun does not raise any special questions (except for efficiency), then the land-based, with its mobility and vulnerability, so far does not provide the slightest opportunity for optimism at all.
Of course, sooner or later, with the development of appropriate technologies, the railgun can turn into a real weapon. But this is a matter of time, moreover, many believe that this is a matter of a very long period of time.
So let's not rush to congratulate the Turkish military on a successful experiment. In the Kurdish problems, the railgun will not help them at all.
