NonCredibleDefense

409 readers

181 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

PugJesus@piefed.social

Battleships are back? What? How do I even meme this? How is this not already a meme? Why is the usa like this? Do they know why battleships stopped being effective as line combatants? (infosec.pub)

submitted 1 day ago by M0oP0o@mander.xyz to c/noncredibledefense@piefed.social

52 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I caught the orange man talking on the radio, as I am not american I knew it was going to be something stupid but this? I thought it was a joke, an onion like thing, but nooooo. What sealed it is when in the very speech about the new 100x battleships, trump stated that he did not know why the us stopped using battleships....

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

would not hit the target at the speeds needed

As a projectile falls, it is accelerated by the force of gravity and gains speed.

you would need to shoot so high that you would be putting the dart into a sub orbital trajectory and without guidance be lucky to hit anything

The projectile fired by the railgun is GPS guided. What you're describing is literally the exact situation it is designed for. It is intended to leave Earth's atmosphere.

The GPS-guided projectile will exit the launcher at approximately 2500 meters/second. On the way to its target, the projectile would leave the Earth's atmosphere, making it less susceptible to jamming or interception, and minimizing interference with friendly aircraft upon re-entry into airspace.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/emrg.htm

You're simply incorrect about how any of this works.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes in a vacuum. Good thing the sea is famous for the lack of atmosphere. Not like the projectile exiting and re entering the atmosphere will have any effect on it after all.

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Please see the source in my comment above that I have included.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That link is literally an older report and is a section of the report I linked before. That is the theory from before they tested and found they could not meaningfully guide the dart once in flight and they would need the dart itself to be more steerable (they are not as of unclassified data now). They also have (in the later report) listed missile interception as being a potential future use case that currently they don't have the accuracy for. The issue remains that shooting a projectile into space to hit something not very far away is less then ideal and the project was killed in 2021, only to be brought back now.

From another page on the railgun project: Like the Medieval search for the Holy Grail, the USN's search for a "Super Weapon" ultimately proved to be unsuccessful. In July 2021, the USN cancelled the Railgun development program, citing unresolved problems with barrel life and a low rate of fire. The Navy had spent about $500 million to develop the weapon. Future R&D funding will now go to other weapon systems such as anti-missile lasers.

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

That is the theory from before they tested and found they could not meaningfully guide the dart once in flight and they would need the dart itself to be more steerable

This is false and not mentioned by your source.

citing unresolved problems with barrel life and a low rate of fire

Lol.

You were wrong about something. It's really not a big deal. It's worse to make stuff up to try to seem right and post "sources" that don't even mention what you're talking about.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its right in the first document I linked That is still outdated from 2019. But no please lets keep going about how I am wrong due to you posting a promotional article from the people who are selling the system that does not address anything I stated. Or you can just say the word physics again, that would I am sure help us come to an understanding.

We do both agree that the railgun system was scrapped for good reason, just not the same reasons.

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Its right in the first document I linked.

No, it isn't. If it was, then you could simply quote the relevant text and prove you are right. I'll wait.

posting a promotional article from the people who are selling the system

Again, completely false:

GlobalSecurity.org is NOT a private security/military company, defense contractor, or vendor. We are NOT affiliated with any such entity and we do NOT sell anything. We also do NOT buy any military equipment, machine parts, or other such items. Our website has pages describing weapon systems and other equipment but we do NOT buy or sell them.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/org/index.html