[quote=@Willy Vereb]
<Snipped quote by Durandal>Hm, it'd be sorts of an engineering marvel.
I mean it'd be seriously edged out to match tank railguns at armor-defeating role in spite of being smaller and operated by a much lighter unit.
It'd also question why don't everyone starts adopting such system if it actually works against tanks.
But let's get back to the technicalities.
Because the barrel is 4 times shorter with the same acceleration the gun can only achieve half the velocity compared to tank railguns.
Or to be exact, this is the force of the railgun. You can compensate by using lighter load and lighter rails.
Reducing weight to 1/4th can balance out the speed/length scale here.
You can then compensate the loss in weight by reducing the cross-section of the impact.
Half the diameter, quadruple the theoretical penetration.
Defeating armor is kind of a complex thing though so you can't just safely say this. Actually since the impact energy is halved the tank may absorb the impact still while the heavier slug will penetrate better.

Okay, I won't bore you further with the details.
Point is, it's possible but the chance of scoring a kill will be a gamble even with all these mods.
Overcharging will be inevitable to give the weapon just a faint more edge.
Also the recoil will require bracing/stabilizing to the ground to be properly handled.
I say you would better focus on anti-tank warheads to kill tanks. Meanwhile your railgun can be used against hard targets and bunkers that aren't as well-rounded in protection as contemporary tanks.
[/quote]

I won't and can't question anything you say as you are quite a bit more versed than me in these technologies. I was kind of considering a theme where my army utilized more advanced weapons and equipment to compete with larger powers but that isn't viable given the state of the GEC.

But the point I was addressing in my previous post was that a man-portable rail gun would be far more effective against light and medium vehicles rather such as armored vars and IFVs rather than something on the scale of a tank. That seems a much more viable option given the information you have provided on the subject, for which I must thank you.

Infantry units aren't meant to fight tanks for the most part so the gun was simply something that would serve in mainly defensive positions to hold lighter vehicles at bay while heavier weapons focused on opposing heavy armor.