[FoRK] "Many faces of the Tea Party"

J. Andrew Rogers andrew at ceruleansystems.com
Mon Jun 28 15:03:54 PDT 2010


On Jun 28, 2010, at 2:30 PM, Reese wrote:
>> 
>> Think more like an externally attachable and fully stealthed bomb bay. The bombs would be completely enclosed in a structure composed of the same design and material as the rest of the aircraft. For all intents and purposes, the bombs would be carried internally. The major downside is loss of maneuverability.
> 
> Uhm, what?


What is confusing?  To the external hardpoints where you would typically attach a bomb, you attach a stealthy pod.  The bombs are carried inside the pods attached to the external hardpoints. It is like a detachable version of their internal weapons bays. They've also looked at using disposable shrouds as well. 


>> The Navy railgun is spec-ed to eventually deliver 64 MJ of kinetic energy over long range and requires a destroyer to house the infrastructure.
>> 
>> The Army missile is spec-ed to eventually deliver 10 MJ of kinetic energy over short range and weighs 50 pounds.
> 
> Uhm, cite?


Geez, you aren't trying very hard.


>From Wikipedia on railguns:

"The United States Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division demonstrated an 8 MJ rail gun firing 3.2 kg projectiles in October 2006 as a prototype of a 64 MJ weapon to be deployed aboard Navy warships... Since then, BAE Systems has delivered a 32 MJ prototype to the Navy.[14]"


>From Wikipedia on CKEM (the field testing prototype for the eventual Army deliverable):

"
Max range: 10,000 m
Max weight: 45kg
Velocity: 6.5+ Mach
Penetrator energy: 10MJ
"

The Army deliverable will substantially reduce range to meet the target weight.


More information about the FoRK mailing list