Originally Posted by dragonkingofthestars
it's solid fairy dust,
ground up fairys, they have to use special mill stones plus the ear muffs for the workers takes a lot of money.
$25K is cheap. Hellfire missiles on Apaches are considered cheap, and it would have taken me 3 years salary before tax to just about afford a single one. Lets not even get on the cost of anti-ship missiles or JSOW's which can reach in excess of $750K.
it's a neat toy (if you can call a rail gun a 'toy') but I don't see a practical advantage over the USS Iowa, which has much more total fire power, then this does given rate of fire, actual damage upon impact (this thing would over penetrate everything but a Land raider) and most of all, cost. it just more effective to run three Iowa's then this thing, and the Iowa is outdated as hell. a better investment would be in better fighters and fighter payloads then a gun that can only be used on a out dated delivery system.
(gets off soap box, bows, leaves)
Because for the cost of putting the USS Iowa to sea with its short range weaponry, or the cost of putting the Nimitz etc to sea with its entire complement of aircraft; and due to Flagship status the requirement of a flotilla of auxiliary defense vessels, you can send just one "railgun" mounted weapon system and control an area around the size of Sicily.
What I'm interested in is how they'll be able to get an AoE effect with it. Sure there's the explosive pressure, but considering how Thermobaric Warheads have such a vast radius, it'll be intriguing. Of course, it might just be there to "make war safer/cheaper".
100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3