Re: Rail guns (was: US SOCOM desires...)

["Robert J. Hansen" <rjhansen@xxxxxxxx>]

> Well i wasn't really thinking of jacking up the velocity so much as 
> reducing the mass of the ammunition carried for instance.

HTS won't do that--there are many other engineering advances you need in
order to make the weapon system a more pleasant alternative,
weight-wise.

> Also if one reduced the mass somewhat and put in good recoil compensator 
> system you should be able to increase the "power" of the gun quite a bit 
> over whats currently feasible without getting into silly stuff ranges.

And by adding in a recoil compensation system, you wind up adding to the
weight, which you're trying to minimize.  You run into Hobson's Choice. 
If you want the recoil compensator, then you're adding an enormous
amount to the weight of the weapon--if I recall Other Rob correctly,
something like a third of the weight of the .50 Barrett M82A1 comes from
its hydraulic recoil compensator.  Recoil compensation systems aren't
free.

Science fiction is all well and good, but if you're talking about
reality, then you take a step from the realm of physics square into the
realm of engineering.  Things get *much* different in here.  :)