Army Fires Shells 40 Miles in Upgraded Cannon Test

The Epoch Times ^ | March 7, 2020 Updated: March 7, 2020 | SIMON VEAZEY

[E. Pluribus Unum]

An outsized and upgraded cannon spat shells a distance of 40 miles over the Arizona desert Friday, reaching almost three times as far as its previous incarnation.

The army is scrambling to boost the range of its missiles and artillery as the number one modernization priority.

That program includes an upgrade to a tank-like howitzer, the Extended Range Cannon Artillery, with three times the range and an autoloader, able to launch one round every 6-10 seconds.

On March 6, the prototype, with its unwieldy-looking gun, successfully fired two different types of artillery 40 miles during a demonstration at the Yuma testing range in Arizona, according to Military.com.

The upgrade to the 57-year-old M109 armored self-propelled howitzer launched a rocket-assisted 155 mm round and an Excalibur precision-guided round.

The Excalibur round also hit a precision target, Brig. Gen. John Rafferty told reporters, according to Breaking Defense, but added no further details.

Rafferty is in charge of the Army’s Long Range Precision Fires program (LRPF), which also includes the development of a monster gun that can fire rounds hundreds of miles.

[DUMBGRUNT]

“Missiles cost a lot more than artillery rounds (usually).”

An Army FO that I knew had an occasion to call on the New Jersey.

As he started to walk them in, the sailor told him, tell us where you want it and we will put it there.
Each one is the cost of a new Cadillac.

[Rebelbase]

So it has the potential to accidentally be an anti-aircraft gun?

[Fester Chugabrew]

Correct me if i am wrong, but given the angle of trajectory and distance, can we not ascertain the apex? True, most formulas i’ve seen thus far take velocity into account. Methinks an extrapolation would work with only the two givens, provided the points of origin and destination are ground level and within Earth’s gravity. Mass and wind may also factor in, but for ball park purposes it would be interesting to hash out a figure.

[Rebelbase]

IIRC, somewhere back in time I saw a video of Navy ship with a Marine tank or mobile artillery on the deck firing rounds onshore during an engagement.

[Rebelbase]

“Ear protection is suggested.”

probably wouldn’t have helped here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOPEpsGJyCs

[Spktyr]

Per naval experts, each 16 inch shell cost about $500.

https://www.g2mil.com/battleships.htm

A Tomahawk Land Attack Missile, which is the closest US missile counterpart and was the other option available to the New Jersey in dealing with a land target, costs $1.87M apiece.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)

The recent exception to that rule was the Advanced Gun System’s LRLAP 155mm round which was going to cost $800K-$1M per shot and was comparable in effect to an AGM-119 Penguin, which is less than $800K per missile.

[Spktyr]

Yup, but you can’t leave it as a permanent feature of the ship. Land systems are usually not happy about being exposed to salt spray.

[GreyFriar]

As an old artilleryman, 13E, Fire Direction Center, we had to know the max ord for shells when firing in support of units when there was also close air support coming in. While one can say “big sky, little shell,” tain’t funny if that little shell takes down one of the USAF gets providing close air support to the same group of grunts that you are helping out.

[2111USMC]

[Future Snake Eater]

Cool, but good luck getting any Excalibur rounds. They’re expensive as hell.

[Future Snake Eater]

High elevation firing leads to intense fire-support coordination conversations with the Air Force.

That's why the air picture and the indirect picture are combined into the ground picture in real-time so these things can be coordinated quickly.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Why? Seems like a bunch of missiles, ground to ground, or whatever would be a lot cheaper in the long run wouldn’t it and a lot easier to move around and protect.

Only if money is no object and you like burning it.

A Tomahawk missile costs about $832,000.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3277606/tomahawk-missile-cruise-missiles-syria-us-air-strike

An Excalibur GPS artillery round costs about $60,000.

https://strategypage.com/htmw/htart/articles/20190811.aspx

Sometimes a missile is the only way to go but, when it's not, artillery is the way to go.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

A lot cheaper than a Tomahawk missile though.

[null and void]

ping

[Desslok]

“We’ve shelled the Germans for two weeks and all we have to show for it is a Dachshund with a slight limp.”

-—Capt. Black Adder (WW1)

(one of my favorite British comedy series)

[reed13k]

Given the angle of the gun is approximately 45*, then you can estimate that the altitude would be approximately 20 miles just assuming a 45/45/90 triangle at it’s peak 1/2 way to the 40 mile target. That doesn’t take into account some of the parabolic arc and dynamic forces in play, but is just a very rough estimate.

[Magnum44]

Don’t sweat it. Big sky, little bullet. 😂

[Dundee]

$500 per 16 inch shell... Maybe in 1945 dollars (does it include the propellant cost?).

Currently the regular 5 inch shell (plus propellant, shell is no good without it) costs more than $500. If they were still producing 16 inch rounds, I’d expect them to be a bit more expensive than 2000 pound bombs.

[DUMBGRUNT]

Per naval experts, each 16 inch shell cost about $500.

First, let me state, this is not my line of work and I suspect you are intensely familiar with the newer equipment.
Not trolling or trying to prove any points.

The projectile is 2,700 pounds and I don’t know how many hundred pounds of powder are used for each round.
And the barrel life is about 300 rounds $$$

Nothing Mil-Spec that weighs in at ~3,000 pounds ever cost $500?

I recall seeing an unexploded projectile next to the trail in I Corps RVN. HUGE!

The New Jersey and Puff were always a fun hot topic at the time.

[T-Bird45]

“That’s why the air picture and the indirect picture are combined into the ground picture in real-time so these things can be coordinated quickly.”

My time in the artillery pre-dated the ability to computer integrate the coordination of combined arms operations.