The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 23, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Artillery Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Why don't we have smart artillery shells?
swami    3/21/2004 4:40:11 PM
We have heard so much about smart bombs coming from airplanes, but what about smart artillery shells? Wouldn't it be possible for forward observers to point lasers at targets, and for laser- or GPS-guided artillery shells to hit within ten feet? Are there technical limitations or is it just not cost effective? How is a falling artillery shell fundamentally different from a falling bomb?
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Mark F    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   3/21/2004 5:17:14 PM
There are already laser-guided artillery shells in active service and have been for about 2 decades. It doesn't work that well, but semi-active laser guidance is better than nothing for pinpoint precision. GPS rounds are in development with several ongoing programs in a number of different calibers. The first rounds should be going into active service within the next two years.
 
Quote    Reply

CoolDude    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   3/21/2004 9:44:15 PM
Yea the laster-guided shell is called the Copperhead.
 
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   3/22/2004 3:49:11 AM
The Russian equivalent is also pretty cool, the Krasnopol round. It's more destructive than the Copperhead because it's a bigger shell. I think it also comes in 155mm (Krasnopol-M)..
 
Quote    Reply

Mark F    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   3/22/2004 7:22:09 AM
Except that Krasnopol, like Copperhead, doesn't really work all that well. Copperhead BTW is 155mm. Krasnopol is available in the traditional Russian 152mm caliber and also 155mm to meet an Indian requirement.
 
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   3/22/2004 3:11:22 PM
I really cannot see how either Krasnopol or Copperhead can work anywhere near as well as LGBs, given the enormous forces they are initially subject to. I know Krasnopol is 152mm, but it is a bigger, heavier shell (it is longer, despite the 3mm less diameter).
 
Quote    Reply

hybrid    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   3/22/2004 3:51:52 PM
Major reason is cost. The shell not only has to be accurate precision wise, but must also withstand forces exceeding 10,000 g's at firing. Toss in re-entry heating and cooling thermodynamics, spin, air layer buffeting, and you basically get a whole slew of problems that makes designing a precision rocket seem like a cakewalk. You can design and make precision guided shells like Excalibur and Copperhead, but the problems you end up with mainly come down to cost (for instance Copperhead costs about half a mill to build each, Excalibur currently $93,000 but may be reduced to $10,000 if enough are made, this is compared to the cost of $120 bucks for an average 155 mm shell or about $20,000 for a JDAM)
 
Quote    Reply

Siddar    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   3/23/2004 11:38:11 AM
US seems to have programs for smart rounds for all it artillery types but 105mm guns and 60mm mortar. The navy is working on ergm for 5inch and 155mm guns while army is building excalibur for 155mm guns these two programs are probaly going to be merged togeather soon. The goals of these systems are gps guideance extended range 100nm for egrm and target search and location by excalibur. Also there is work under way to make gps guided version of the standard mlrs rocket this would have around 80km range. It would be very simalar in precsion and payload to airforces SDB bombs. This system seems to be real comptition to excalibur in that it carrys a larger warhead and because of lesser G loading at launch it should be cheaper. There are also guided round programs for 81mm and 120mm mortars im not sure if 120mm rounds made it into production but they were prototyped at least. Special forces want the 81mm rounds in service asap so they should be in the next year are two. Last is netfires a lite wieght rocket system that can fire anti tank missisles in ether a gps guided mode are a second version in a UAV recon then kamkazi mode. This system would be mounted on armored vehicles are HUMVEE are as a stand alone container brought in by helocopter. It really is only matter of cost that has held up wide spread deployment of these systems.
 
Quote    Reply

rocketpower    Guided MLRS   4/11/2004 10:14:27 PM
There is a GPS guided rocket for MLRS family called GMLRS. It basicly takes a normal M26 rocket and straps a GPS reciever on it with controllable fins. It requires a M270A1 (newever variant of M270) or Himars because it needs to get GPS preload from launcher. Nice thing is that it works just like a unguided MLRS rocket. once the M270A1 computer is updated it work exactly the same. It improves accuracy to around 10 meters and boosts range out to 60km. For a more advanced smart weapon check out the BAT (brilliant anti-armor technology) submunition. The BAT is deployed from an ATACMS missle (launched from MLRS). Nice thing about BAT is you don't need an FO or laser designator. Just point ATACMS missile in right area and the BATS each select a target and actively home in. The BATS are mean, smart, and can aquire targets by movement, heat, or sound.
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   5/3/2004 10:41:09 PM
Doesn't anyone know about the SADARM (Sense And Destroy ARMor) 155mm "skeet" round? It seems to be pretty "smart" to me...
 
Quote    Reply

Texastillidie    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   4/4/2005 12:58:12 AM
The current generation of U.S. Army smart artillery shells are called "copperhead" rounds, and are available for 105mm and 155mm cannons. Practically all artillery being used in Iraq at the present time is "smart", because it is being used near civilians. This stuff is way-smart. A 155mm (6.1 inch)shell from a Paladin self-propelled gun can hit the turret of a moving tank at 7 miles (at night). Texastillidie
 
Quote    Reply

neutralizer    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells?   4/4/2005 4:08:47 AM
It is indeed news that Copperhead is available in 105mm. Actually the only people these days who seem keen on laser homing shells are the Russians. They have several including in 155mm.
 
Quote    Reply

B.Smitty    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells? - Copperhead   4/4/2005 7:49:49 AM
Copperhead is a 155mm only round. The U.S. doesn't operate a guided 105mm round at present.
 
Quote    Reply

doggtag    RE:Why don't we have smart artillery shells? - Copperhead   4/4/2005 1:41:35 PM
Do we even still use Copperheads? I was aware that when we were still using 105mm tank guns, there was the STAFF round which was under development/testing, but short of articles in ARMOR magazine and a few other defense-related publications, you can't find much about it now since we've moved on to the 120mm series. Now, there is the Israeli LAHAT in 120mm, and ATK is creating the MRM There are scores of 120mm mortar PGMs in service and under development. And Bae recently announced a DARPA contract to prove a laser seeker could be packed into a 60mm mortar round. As for gun-launching: there was the Merlin 81mm round which had little interest. And the Russians did a proof-of-concept for their laser-seeker tank-gun fired shells for an 85mm variant, but production runs only built 125mm, 115mm, and 100mm versions (Reflex). Smarter fuzes are being designed every few months it seems. And any number of 155mm shells can be adapted with these smart fuzes. Alenia Difesa/OTO Melara is working on the Davide and Volcano guided shells for its 76mm and 127mm naval guns. And guns as small as 40mm have been tested with guided ammunition (although the smaller you get, the more payload you lose in place of guidance and control mechanisms.) There are currently smart weapons in use in the US Army, if one counts the rockets of the MLRS system like the TACMS. But we (US Army) haven't really fielded a wide variety of them (PGMs) to the extent the USAF has. We'll get there, though. FCS variants will certainly be equipped with smart artillery and mortar projectiles.
 
Quote    Reply

GrOuNd_ZeRo       10/22/2007 12:01:30 AM
Now there is the XM982 Excaliber round too, but it's GPS guided like the XM898, should be safer to deploy AND should be more accurate than a laser designated weapon.
 
I was a M119A1 crewmember and there are no copperhead rounds available but DPICM's (Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munition) are available.
 
I am now a M109A6 crewmember, well, I actually am a crewmember of the M992A2 (CAT) FAASV, Carrier-Ammunition, Tracked or Field Artillery Ammunition Supply Vehicle, but my section allows me to train with the gun crew.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S       10/22/2007 7:56:38 PM
There is a guiding fuze entering the system.  It has a guidance system built in and vanes for controlling flight.  It can be used on the common 155 HE round, turning it into  near PGM.   I dont have a refrence for it handy, but there was a nice brief on it in the Marine Corps Gazette bout a year ago.

The down side to Copperhead was that the FO could only designate one target a a time.  Or about one vehical every two - three minutes.  If everything worked smoothly.  So if a dozen tanks & APC appeared two kilometers away they could close in before the FO could get more than one shot designated and fired.

In our fireplanning the Copperhead was more of a 'sniper' type weapon for attacking single high value target  rather than a anti tank weapon as it was advertised back in those days.
 
Quote    Reply

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy