Now to test on the Somali's..........j/k
That 100 mile range just seems silly. I'm sure it can heave a bullet that far, but with what accuracy? A 100-mile range rifle on a moving ship? You could probably hit a city with it, but not much else at that range. The technology is cool, though.
Are you familiar with GPS limited terminal guidance USAF uses?
The articles I've read just call the round a "projectile" or a "kinetic energy" replacement for an explosive shell. That doesn't sound like a smart weapon. To me, that sounds like a 23 pound bullet. But, I yield to those in the know.
The cool thing is that this gun seems to be able to fire those "projectiles" like a machine gun. I could see how a stream of very fast boolets could be a problem for a target.
The cool thing is that this gun seems to be able to fire those "projectiles" like a machine gun. I could see how a stream of very fast boolets could be a problem for a target.
Not so, actually with that range and proper positioning I'd guess you could say, intercept an missile just off launch for instance. Once the ballistics of the gun are understood, the accuracy is a matter of determining the telemetry of the target, if moving.
If stationary, Naval guns have always had a great reputation for superior accuracy. Mostly because their position and relative motion is quite precise. Therefore able to be properly compensated for in the ballistic calculation. The ability to add some sort of terminal guidance would only improve that accuracy.
Yes, I spent more than an afternoon with a Clancy book....
PS - There are also some interesting stats about population density, coast lines, and ranges. Yep, 100 NM covers most of it pretty well.....
Last edited:
The 16" "naval rifles" on the Iowa-class battleships were MOA rifles at 20+ miles. I'd imagine that these would do better with modern targeting and fire control systems; IIRC, the Abrams is a heck of a shot on the move...
Hmm--would you even need a 4473? Is this even a firearm?
Similar threads
