Magnetic Weaponry

Rail & coil guns have an advantage in that recoil isn't as abrupt due to the more constant acceleration. I doubt these weapons will be viable even in the next 15 years though. Maybe in 25 years but I wouldn't hold my breath.

In a rail gun the projectile ride between two rails that make up the barrel. Current is passed into one rail with the projectile acting as a bridge to the other, non energized, rail. Then Lorentz force accelerates the projectile until it leaves the barrel and the connection between the two rails is broken. In a coil gun the barrel is surrounded by coils of copper wire one after another down the length of the barrel which turn on then off to pull the projectile forward.

Attached: Coilgun_animation.gif (930x602 56.09 KB, 131.86K)

Sure. I'd like one that has the power of a conventional current day firearm without much of the drawback, and if or when the tech gets high enough anyone can automagically build one out of readily available components, who wouldn't.
Others already mentioned it, but having a man portable high enough energy storage appears to be the bigger hurdle.
You always have to clean any weapon to some degree. Anything with moving parts the higher the probability you must clean the thing at some point.
If there comes a time when all you need is somewhere to plug your glawkgauss 2000 to recharge the hyperduper battery, and have a bunch of size correct drill rod for the projectile, it would be real NATO. But it's probably not going to happen for a very long while sadly.

Very little.
The biggest problem railguns are facing right now is that people are dropping R&D funding due to technical hurdles such as battery size, no proper mount for the gun, and the rails themselves fucking melt after a couple of shots. Tests are taking too long too, and that's just for the naval gun design. There's also the bureaucracy problem.
taskandpurpose.com/navy-electromagnetic-railgun-budget/

We're waiting to see how the Frenchies and Germans fare with their new Pegasus railgun.

Is there any kind of artillery application with magnetic weaponry? Is there any way it could be made with a higher ROF and more potent on a whole than conventional artillery?

If what I've heard of HE-based propellants is true, then conventional artillery is far from reaching its true potential. If you wander a bit away from it, then you will find CLGG technology, which makes magnetic weapons look like a joke. Stray even further away, and you will find explosively formed penetrators and Voitenko compressors. Although at that point we are edging close to sci-fi territory, and so we can discuss plasma weapons.

Railmemes have artillery possibilities, but in terms of range or energy there's nothing that they do that can't be done more efficiently with CLGG or conventional powder. You also can't use "smart" warheads with them as the magnets will fuck up any electronic components you may have. The reason the navy is considering the railguns at all isn't performance but safety: a few capacitors getting hit will produce much less of a bang than a whole powder magazine.

Here is the great truth. Powder magazines were a fucking HUGE hazard on naval ships, they are more than glad to be rid of them if possible. Other than that, it seems to be more theoretical than anything else.

Gunpowder is stupid simple to make for industrialized nations, its a well understood process that hasn't even changed all that much for a long time. It can be stockpiled sometimes for decades depending on the conditions, although blackpowder is obsolete it actually can improve with age, batteries that are charged only lose energy over time and have to be constantly re-energized. Which leads to the biggest difference, battery technology honestly isn't there yet, too big, too bulky, too inefficient. Despite improvements, they are still far from ideal or even truly, honestly competitive with many forms of firearms, artillery.

I can load up a guy with a heavy load of 400 rounds of 7.62x51 and send him somewhere, have him march through tough terrain and into the middle of nowhere, he can fire 400 aimed rounds, each round of the same close potential, accurate enough to hit a man at 600 yards, and if he needs more a man could easily bring him more by hand in pouches or a backpack or anything, even his hands. To accomplish this, how the rail gun compete? What kind of battery power, what kind of accuracy, what kind of weight and bulk, what about his ability to be resupplied in the field? Does the man level rail gun even come close in ANY regard, or are we just takling about potentials in one strenght or another while ignoring the capabilities of the whole?

Brass and steel are cheap and easy to draw to form cases. Copper, lead, mild still are cheap and easy to make bullets from. The combat rifle is simple enough to manufacture, and in times of crisis even major first world nations have nigger rigged submachine guns out of almost nothing but pipes to supply their troops with a working weapon in the field. Can any of this be said of the railgun and its ammunition, components? Even expensive artillery and big guns are relatively cheap, even easy to manufacture in comparison.

What about specialized gun improvements in the last while? Can the rail gun out perform new ideas in the 6 inch naval gun with specialized ammunition that can extend its range? We've had fast firing 6 inch naval guns for an extremely long time, what's the reload and fire rate of modern rail guns? IN reality, not theory.

Recoil only appears once the projectile leaves the barrel. This means that recoil is just as abrupt as with firearms.

Completely false. Recoil emerges while the projectile is being accelerated, as per Newton's third law.

Attached: AutistPost.jpg (450x305, 29.08K)

ever heard of a fellow named newton?

Attached: Stop being stupid.mp4 (480x360, 175.67K)

YOU STUPID KRAUT

Attached: 07a940a6a7d1f7d72de62be0a7dbc96ed3ceab1423827a6fd296107a3e35a0ac.jpg (1024x923, 155.94K)

Get yourself a proper education Strelok. We need more people to actually understand the weapons we discuss

Attached: 1402088484813.png (401x497, 338.82K)

I suppose there's a place for a gauss gun mortar. This is mostly because current mortars waste a lot of cheese, so it's justifiable mass-wise to have a gauss capacitor + generator. But it would be even better to do something like the soviet centripetal mine thrower.

First there's a minute negative recoil when a hammer moves to strike a primer.
Then the minute negative recoil from the primer exploding, which is immediately countered and cancelled out by the huge recoil from the deflagration in the casing forcing the bullet out.

Well, the cool thing about coil guns is this: They don't habe a fixed caliber. if you were to manufacture the projectile in the gun, by shaving it off a metal block, you can swap between 5.56 and 7.62 on a whim. the guidance is either magnetic or on cermaic rails, which can be spring loaded.