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.

[Ecliptic]

Russia can’t even capture the whole of Ukraine. How long have the 2 been fighting? Our support has kept Russia at bay.

[Spktyr]

Most likely 1945 dollars, as they didn’t crank up production lines again. Also, they made hundreds of thousands if not millions of them in WW2. Economies of scale and all.

But even so, a Mk84’s (2000lb dumb bomb) per unit cost was $3100 back in 2000, not exactly a lot worse compared to literally any guided missile. Even adding a Paveway guidance package to the dumb bomb only adds ~$25K to it.

[Jeff Chandler]

Yes, but our armed forces are diverse and we have Gurl PWR!!!

[Spktyr]

We can’t even capture and control all of Afghanistan. What’s your point?

I’d also note that the Ukraine was actually where the Soviet Union made most of their post war tanks - the Ukraine is reasonably well armed and trained, and the outside aid they’re getting certainly helps. On the other hand, the Russians aren’t really pushing into it with everything they have and are also fighting in Syria.

[Spktyr]

I’m assuming the Navy stated cost was in WW2 dollars due to when most of the projectiles were made. Economies of scale when you are cranking out millions of copies of something are pretty impressive.

Gunpowder on the scale that the US Navy was buying it was surprisingly cheap too, even today the government Lake City arsenal often pays well less than $8 per pound, would have been even less back then.

[Spktyr]

Can we load Gurl PWR into a cannon and fire it at the enemy?

[The Antiyuppie]

High elevation firing leads to intense fire-support coordination conversations with the Air Force. While it’s probably classified, it would be interesting to hear how high that projectile flies in its trajectory.

You can make a pretty good guess with math.

[The Antiyuppie]

“Sometimes low-tech is better. Pound the enemy with cheap artillery as a demoralizing tactic.“

The 6-10 seconds between rounds caught my attention.

[Spktyr]

The older Tomahawks they fired were $832k - but their replacement price is $1.87M for a new Block IV TLAM.

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

[Dundee]

Back in 2000 they still had a metric butt load of 500/1000/2000 pound bombs from the Vietnam era.

That said, the only way missiles are cheaper than arty for putting warhead on forehead is to get a contractor to come up with a new precision/stealth/hypersonic/cyber-ready/environmentally-friendly/insert-latest-buzzword-here ‘wonder-weapon’.

[The Antiyuppie]

“High elevation firing leads to intense fire-support coordination conversations with the Air Force. While it’s probably classified, it would be interesting to hear how high that projectile flies in its trajectory.

“You can make a pretty good guess with math.”

I’m guessing 150-200,000 feet, 30-40 miles.

[Taxman]

These are guns!

“The US Navy’s Iowa (four ships) class battleships carried a main armament of nine 16”/50 caliber guns in three triple turrets. The previous North Carolina (two ships) and South Dakota (four ships) classes carried a very similar main battery of nine 16”/45 caliber guns. These 10 ships, completed between 1941 and 1944, comprised the USN’s “third generation” battleships and all saw service in WW II.

The designation 16”/50 means a 16” diameter shell and a barrel 50 calibers long. That would be 16x50=800 inches, or a barrel 66.66 feet long. The 16”/45 gun fired the same shells from a slightly shorter barrel 60 feet long.”

https://www.chuckhawks.com/16-50_gun_facts.html

Too bad the BBs are museum pieces!

During the Vietnam era, I flew several “range clearance” missions for the USS New Jersey prior to her deployment to Vietnam. A full broadside seen FRom the air is damned impressive!

Then, in 1983, as a civilian contractor, I went to Hawaii in New Jersey and witnessed, up close and personal, several main gun shoots. The two weeks I spent in New Jersey remain one of my most memorable life experiences!

HST, “smart bombs” relegated BBs to the dustbin of history, and they may do the same to long range artillery.

[MHGinTN]

Jerusalem, ultimately.

[Spktyr]

$3100 was the new production price in 2000, IIRC, not the acquisition cost of older ones. A lot of the old Vietnam-era bombs ended up having to be disposed of instead of dropped in combat, too. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/9421083.pdf

[Spktyr]

Actually, it was the advance in anti-capital-ship missiles that finally doomed the battleship. When man-portable antitank missiles can penetrate 800mm of armor steel behind a layer of explosive reactive armor, naval attack missiles won’t have much of a problem with an Iowa’s armor.

They’re awesome, but missiles are the main combat means in modern sea war and they’re horribly vulnerable to those.

[Taxman]

“. . . man-portable antitank missiles can penetrate 800mm of armor steel?” That is 31.496063 Inches! Hellofamissle!

BBs may have been vulnerable to missiles, but smart bombs took over the role of the BB for land bombardment.

Before smart bombs, BBs put the fear of God into the bad guys back in the day! 2700 lbs of high explosive will ruin your day!

And, by the end of their life cycle, the 16” naval guns were very accurate!

IIRC the BBs were mothballed (1992) before the bad guys had missiles that were effective against them.

[lurk]

What is the time from tube to impact at 40 miles?

[lurk]

What is the time from tube to impact at 40 miles?

And would this make a good elk or moose round?

[Spktyr]

Negative - Exocet came out in 1967 and can penetrate somewhere between 54-72 inches of armor, depending on a number of factors. Exocet is considered a smallish antishipping missile. A heavy capital ship antishipping missile (like the Russian Granit - SS-N-19 Shipwreck) can penetrate over 140-150 inches of armor. The Granit came out in 83, and its predecessors weren’t a lot less capable. Shaped charges are amazingly penetrative. So, no, the bad guys had missiles that were very effective against them well before retirement.

Exocet and all the other missiles in the world arms market are why surface combatants are only armored against small arms from the 60s on - there’s no point to WW2 style armoring when no practical amount of armor will stop an antiship missile.

[Revolutionary]

You take the vertical component of the starting velocity and apply gravity (32.2) multiplied by time to reach zero vertical velocity. Then 1/2 a*t squared to get the height.