this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2025
95 points (100.0% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
409 readers
270 users here now
Militaria shitposting central! Post memes, tasteless jokes, and sexual cravings for military equipment and/or nuclear self-destruction!
Rules:
- Posts must abide by Piefed.social terms and conditions
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
Related communities:
!forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
For the other, slightly less political NCD, !noncredibledefense@sh.itjust.works
founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It can actually (theoretically) shoot real far away.
As in, when the target area is far enough that the projectile would have slowed down due to drag, long ago and start dropping more than it is going forward.
The problem here, would lie in the stabilisation of the bullet and making sure it actually hits the target instead of a few km away, because faster bullets apparently have a greater difficulty staying on track.
The projectiles fired by the railgun leave the atmosphere and are GPS guided.
Yeah, did you look into what "GPS guided" means here? Its not what you think.
I think they are trying to crack a joke.
Considering that the escape velocity on Earth's surface is ~11200m/s and railgun speeds tend to be around 5000m/s^[at least in Wikipedia, all stated values are < 5km/s] (i.e. less than half) and also that the escape velocity would be considering a normal direction whereas railgun usage tends to be more tangential (from the surface of the Earth), I wouldn't be expecting any casual leave-the-atmosphere scenarios.
As far as guided systems go, last I checked there wasn't enough leeway to add any electronic or mechanical elements in the projectiles.