Posted on 09/17/2020 1:43:24 AM PDT by Patriot777
In an amazing first, an artillery cannon took out a cruise missile.
An M109 Paladin 155 mm howitzer made history recently by shooting down a fast-moving maneuvering cruise missile with a “hypervelocity projectile” able to travel at speeds up to Mach 5, according to an Air Force announcement. Historically, armored vehicles such as tanks, howitzers or infantry carriers have not operated with an ability to destroy fast-moving, long-range cruise missiles, yet the successful demonstration breaks new ground.
The shoot-down, which took place at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, destroyed a “surrogate” Russian cruise missile target using the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS). Firing a hypervelocity projectile (HVP) from an artillery cannon is a concept that has been under development for many years, dating back to Roper’s time directing the Pentagon’s Strategic Capabilities Office. The origins of the HVP can be traced to the Navy’s Rail Gun developmental effort as well as initiatives intended to explore firing the HVP from deck-mounted guns on Navy surface ships.
Due to its ability to reach speeds of up to 5,600 miles per hour, the hypervelocity projectile is engineered as a kinetic energy warhead, meaning no explosives are necessary. It can travel at speeds up to 2,000 meters (6,562 feet) per second, a speed which is about three times that of most existing weapons. The weapon brings such force, power and range that could hold enemies at risk from greater distances and attack targets with the kinetic energy force equivalent to a multi-ton vehicle moving at 160 miles per hour, developers have said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The only way to respond is early warning or automated response. Early warning comes from space based systems. Automated response results in mistakes from spoofs.
I know we will come up a response, but weapons escalations are interesting to watch.
That was in Sandia ...which is up near ABQ.
I wonder if the same BS is occurring at Lawrence Livermore and Sandia labs?...
Naval guns are not hand loaded. Since 155 mm is about 6 in and naval guns are 5” do you envision an issue adapting for naval use?
Since when does the USAF operate M109 Paladin’s?
That’s one messed up article. It’s not a rail gun. The round is a ramjet. Development was multinational for the Army.
Gotcha, thank you.
Sandia Labs in Albuquerque.
A bit of trivia: Sandía is the Spanish word for watermelon. The mountains that form the eastern border of Albuquerque are called the Sandia Mountains because the sunsets here make them look like the inside of a watermelon. Beautiful sight.
I wondered about the photo, I’ve learned to not place too much confidence in accuracy of photos on the web.
Rail gun projectile has no propulsion except for the electromagnetic drive.
The ramjet looks pretty dirty on the burn.
The ones that amaze me are the Excalibur howitzer rounds. Incredible accuracy due to guidance fins that pop up after firing and correct path in flight. 50 mile range with amazing accuracy.
I don’t know. Have not heard, but suspect they both do too. The one that was publicized was Los Alamos. They are near Espanola, and long ago it was a dismissal offense to tell and Espanola joke while at work at Los Alamos.
I know some interesting tails about dumb stuff that was forced on even minorities by the EEOC. On guy at a plant near Amarillo, had his 3 wheel bike(to deliver parts) painted with his name on it. He was really proud to work there. He painted his name and “Numero uno Mexicano” on his bike. The EEOC forced him to remove Numero uno Mexicano from it, said it was a racial slurr. He was Mexican, how could it be a racial slurr. Nuts!
He argued to keep it, “I am the Number 1 Mexican”. EEOC did not listen.
The first thing that I thought of reading the headline was that during WWII both the Germans and Japanese developed anti-aircraft rounds for their battleships’ main guns. Yamato used them against the attacking aircraft of Task Force 58 in 1945.
I thought momentarily that these were similar rounds for the 155.
They definitely are interesting. A little terrifying but definitely interesting. What happens when the world you live in isn’t big enough for the weapons you have? :-)
We are not there yet but at some point SOME of the weapons created will be of more use for battles between planets than countries
If you are conversant, then you remember the Extended Range Guided Munition (DRGM) that was supposed to extend range to 150NM - but when it got there, there was insufficient room in the projectile for effects to cause harm to the enemy and it took several minutes in its travels - which eliminated moving targets from your list.
As with many expensive and insufficiently thought out projects, it died a natural death.
Scramjet? Fire one of those from ac130.....yeah....
Being an aviation sailor, I have no knowledge of artillary. However, if the system can be upgraded to fire the projectile at such velocity, can’t the loading process and positioning of the turret also be upgraded. Must the projectile be fed in the same sequence as you state above? I’m thinking some kind of super sized Phalanx without the high speed feed, but as maneuverable. Serious question and thanks for you service.
Or the moon once colonized. That is why I agree with Pres. Trump creating the new military branch, SPACE FORCE. We are already competing with various countries regarding satellite destruction. The US needs to take dominance of close/outer orbits and beyond. Space is truly the final frontier, and will eventually be where wars are won or lost.
There was a movie where a bunch of old-time astronauts were sent up to stop the decaying orbit of a Soviet era comms satellite. Turns out is was nuclear missile platform. I suspect such platforms are being designed if not already in production.
To modify this system to run at higher speeds - using a sliding block system, for instance, means making the system incapable of firing standard 155mm ammunition. There have been 155mm SP guns that have been automated to load and fire ammunition faster but they have required a heavier loading system to do it - like the French GCT gun system or the PzH 2000 or the US Army's Crusader - which makes the turret very large and heavy.
To make something large and heavy move faster requires very large actuation systems which in turn, require much greater power.
Very quickly you begin to see a 70 ton gun system which can't cross bridges and is very hard to transport by air or sea to the forward combat zones. It's all possible - but the penalties are weight, expense and an entirely new ammunition system.
Don't even consider the towed 155mm systems - dang things are heavy, manually operated, and slow; my best gun crews were flailing for 12 minutes to emplace and ready their guns to fire when they rolled into a new position. And that was with ten strong young men doing their level best!
However you did address my question as positioning. You said: "To make something large and heavy move faster requires very large actuation systems which in turn, require much greater power."
I would agree with your above analysis regarding actuation and needed power. Basic physics.
Still, I ask can't nuke powered ships re-direct their power to the gun, especially Carriers or CGN's? As a sailor at general quarters I knew that many systems were shut down to give more power to defense and offense and damage control. That was way back in the Cold War, so I don't know how the current systems work, especially on nuke powered vessels.
My point still remains, if these Mark 5 kinetic rounds can be operational, why can't we make make the Howitzer (or a new cannon) more ready capable with radar instead of some old battleship gun pointing in the general direction? I'm thinking I may off base, again no knowledge of artillery.
Pinging all fellow artillerymen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.