Smart / Guided Artillery

[cassh]

For my sins I used to work for Army Technology and remember two listed products of guided sub 155mm systems -

Bofors/Saab Strix 120mm autonomous heat-seeking AT mortar round

and the

Bofors Excalibur 155mm guided projectile artillery shell

Don't know where the Strix advertorial went - but only the latter remains here Bofors Excalibur Guided Artillery Ammunition.

There is also an interesting Rheinmetall system here Rheinmetall GPS Guided Ammunition.

These systems have been about a while now (Strix since 1994).

Although Strix and Copperhead type artillery delivered anti-armour rounds are very impressive, I'm interested to find out to what extent the more mundane HE shells have been smartened up with GPS direction in-flight a al mini JDAM or laser-designation/tracking-in guidance on targets with arty is possible a la mini GBUs.

What I was wondering is, whether the U.S. Army has a day-to-day general purpose GPS/laser designated type smart 155mm HE round that guarantees 10/12-figure grid-reference accuracy.

Again, I'm not talking about AT shells like Copperhead or Strix, but smart delivery of sub 155mm High-Explosive or DPCICM - does this exist or will it by 2007 for U.S. forces?

If so will this type of arty mission be available?

[flamingknives]

US army, to the best of my knowledge, operates Guided MLRS unitary rockets and possibly Excalibur unitary 155mm shells. Not sure the latter is in active service yet.

Both are good for 10m CEP, according to the Manufacturers

Copperhead, AFAIK, is not used.

[Dinger]

Heh. I thought copperhead (155mm cannon-launched (laser-)guided projectile) was still in inventories. After firing, it is fin-stabilized, and the last 13 seconds or so are guided (assuming it sees an appropriately lazed target). I understand its employment is a little tricky, since it requires the observer to be lasing with the gun to his back and the target to the front, and it has a "footprint" within which it can be guided that varies according to range (they have a bunch of little oblique shaped overlays they put on the map to see what they can and cannot hit).

Excalibur is simply GPS-guided.

Guided means it has fins that give it directional control.

Strix is a terminal-homing shell. Terminal Homing I suppose means that it has a propulsion system that assists at the end of the trajectory. For the strix, this means that it has some sort of IR/acoustic sensor in the front (correct me if I'm wrong) and, on the way down, if it spots a "live" target, it has little rocket ports in the sides that push it towards it. AFAIK, the US does not use Strix.

BONUS and SADARM are sensor-fuzed. SADARM (which the US has used in Iraq, to great effect) bursts at something like 1000m over the target, and deploys two submunitions. Parachutes slow the subs, and they scan below using a combination of mm-radar, acoustics and optics (again, I think) for appropriate targets. When they find one, they fire an explosively-formed projectile at the target.

But many, many useful targets for artillery do not require 10-figure-grid accuracy. Precision munitions have their uses, and can be quite impressive, but it's still an area effect weapon. When possible, direct fire on a destruction target requiring HE is preferable.

[cassh]

Hi Dinger - to quote myself...

Again, I'm not talking about AT shells like Copperhead or Strix, but smart delivery of sub 155mm High-Explosive or DPCICM

BONUS (also listed on army technology Bofors page above ) SADARM submunition, Strix and Copperhead are all anti-armour munitions - specifically what I said we're not talking about here.

I'm interested in precision delivery of HE/Blast artillery munitions on point targets.

The reason is to see whether the U.S. has altered/modernised their FIBUA/MOUT environment fire-support capability and doctrine where factors such as extreme danger-close, unknown FF locations/FLOT, collateral damage and civilian casualties may all play a factor in weapon system selected. This is why bog-standard HE or area delivery DPICM submunitions are less suited to this investigation, and anti-armour rounds are irrelevant.

So to reiterate - does anyone know whether the U.S. military will be deploying a precision delivered artillery projectile system by 2007? And if so, has this weapon system been used in a MOUT environment yet?

[Dinger]

Again, it sounds like what you're asking for is an SU-152. I'm pretty sure the US is fielding Excalibur rounds or something analogous relatively soon.

But what you describe is sort of like the copperhead issue: for some things, using artillery is more complicated and less effective than other means.

A guided howitzer shell is much more maneuverable and precise when fired low angle than it is high angle. But urban environments often render low-angle fire undesirable. Indirect fire -- even precision indirect fire -- by its nature creates greater risk of collateral damage of all sorts. Better to have something with a gun on it take it out directly.

I too am interested to hear if the US has any new doctrine regarding the use of precision HE artillery shells in urban areas, but it really doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by cassh:

I'm interested in precision delivery of HE/Blast artillery munitions on point targets.

The reason is to see whether the U.S. has altered/modernised their FIBUA/MOUT environment fire-support capability and doctrine where factors such as extreme danger-close, unknown FF locations/FLOT, collateral damage and civilian casualties may all play a factor in weapon system selected. This is why bog-standard HE or area delivery DPICM submunitions are less suited to this investigation...

I think the Israelis have been using guided missiles fired from attack helos for this mission for a while now. Have the US forces in Iraq followed suit?

Michael

[Dinger]

Which does raise the question: what about artillery called in from airborne observers? Will we have AH-64s calling in ATACMs from MLRS units 100 km back? Or is that considered "deep penetration" and outside the scope of the stryker module concept?

[Peter Cairns]

Dinger,

If you can call it in then it should be in.

The whole point about Stryker is speed of response and tactical mobility.

If a recon element of a Stryker Bn comes across a Tank regiment of 30+ T-72's ready to move out, then if the reaction time of the updated MLRS really is under 30 sec, then within two to three minutes of detection it can have an ATACMS, shower the whole regiment with AT bomblets.

So I think they should be in.

Peter.

[MikeyD]

For 'precision' HE (beyond GPS-aided aiming of tube artillery) we'd probably be looking at laser and GPS bombs from aircraft in the game. I believe GPS aiming fins are being put onto bombs as small as 250 lbs (as opposed to 2000) to limit collateral damage. They were talking about developing really-really reduced size munitions to fit internally in the F-22 Raptor (ugh, awful name), but I've been out of the loop on that subject for a couple years now.

There seem have been quite a number of Pentagon 'brilliant' munitions programs lately that only get about 3/4 the way through development before someone pulls the plug on them. Your 'brilliant' 155 munitions will probably be fielded about the same time as the Palladin

[flamingknives]

Excalibur is quite well advanced, and Guided MLRS (not ATACMS) is already in service.

[cassh]

edit typo - dyslexics ruel...

Some thoughts...

</font>

• Strix is a 120mm Mortar AT projectile.</font>
• It's been around a while now, as have active telemetry and micro GPS transponders.</font>
• The Stryker Brigade has organic 120mm mortars.</font>
• Mortars have high trajectory and low velocity.</font>
• A laser-designated artillery projectile for targets in an urban environment would be better served with a high trajectory and low velocity type delivery that would 'seek' at its apogee.</font>
• Why require ground troops to carry endless LAW/bunker-buster/thermobaric rounds to neutralise targets that a 40mm grenade cannot reach or neutralise when the flexibility of artillery delivered HE/blast effect shell could be available.</font>

The potential of a 120mm precision-guided HE/blast effect round is self-evident.

This is what I would call a logical exploration of possibilities.

This is not some random "I like big weapon systems that blown-stuff-up" (SU-152 Dinger), it is asking how and in what ways current/existing technologies might be employed in medium/high intensity MOUT.

To ignore this type of weapon systems and pretend they don't/cannot exist is a bit King Canute-ish and would leave CMx2 horribly exposed on the realism front should the U.S. Army start using such munitions mid 2006-ish.

My question, again without wishing to sound like a droning harpy is, does anyone know whether a point-attack precision guided artillery HE/blast-effect weapon for the U.S. military is on the horizon?

If Excalibur is being used has its accuracy been improved from 10m CEP to something more acceptable for this role (2-3m CEP)? Granted, in the open a circle of equal probability of 10 metres is very accurate, but it is a long way off when you need the shell to detonate in the interior of a specific house… it could land two houses down the street, or over the back garden in another street altogher.

Just a side note - thought a single MLRS rocket had a kill zone of about 200-300m square - or is this maximum area covered? Would this not make calling in this mission a very dangerous move on the smaller map scales of CMx2? Danger-carpet rather than danger-close...

[flamingknives]

The GMLRS is a unitary rocket with an 82 kg warhead, so it doesn't quite have the area-effect of a conventional sub-munition rocket.

Precision weapons are generally defined as ones where the blast area is larger than the capability for accuracy, and apparently 155mm shells with 10m CEP fit this description.

I don't think that you'll get much better than 10m CEP without changing the guidance system. Apart from the difficulty of guiding a gun-launched shell with GPS, how accurately can you designate a target with it?

[MikeyD]

I recall reading someone (he may have been Finnish) on this board bragging about dropping an 60mm(?) mortar round into an oil barrel after the 2nd or 3rd attempt. Perhaps a precision mortar round would be 'guilding the lilly'? A laser guided mortar round would have difficultied since the whole point of mortaring is to reach places outside of your LOS. What is Stryx's method of guidance? I can't recall off the top of my head. Optical or radar? Milimeter wave radar implies it would only attack tank-size objects.

I do agree with cassh that Stryker mortars could be much more valuable in a fight than the 'sexier' weapons systems. For example, they seem to be just about the only line of defense against a mid-range guided missile threat - blasting missile launcher teams out of their postions. I imagine with GPS mapping and aiming they should be able to put their first mortar rounds directly on suspected positions within moments!

[flamingknives]

Most mortar fire is observed though.

[Peter Cairns]

I know there are a number of people looking at Fibre Optic 120mm mortar rounds, which effectively let the firere look down on the target.

On difficulty with PG mortars in an urban setting are things like multstory carparks which effectively give the defender a reinforced concrete roof.

Not only does this obsure vision for a designator, but I doubt if a mortar round would penetrate 1 floor let alone servral. I am assuming the target would have the sense to fire from deep within, as you would from woods as opposed to the edge.

What are the stats on GMLRS, I remember someone saying ( not on this forum) that as the diameter and length of the forward munition carrying section of a MLRS round was virtually the same as a Hellfire, the two would be a marriage made in heaven,

The same effectiveness as a $40m Apache from a $2m MRLS, with less risk and without the 60 mile round trip to refuel and rearm. This assumes something like a Stryker unit to designate targets of course.

Peter.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

On difficulty with PG mortars in an urban setting are things like multstory carparks which effectively give the defender a reinforced concrete roof.

Not only does this obsure vision for a designator, but I doubt if a mortar round would penetrate 1 floor let alone servral. I am assuming the target would have the sense to fire from deep within, as you would from woods as opposed to the edge.

That's an interesting problem that might be fun to explore in the game. I can think of several ways to approach it. Just which would work best would depend on the resources on hand, and how many of the bad guys there were, how they were armed, and how they were deployed.

1. Cover the baddies with suppressive fire and then some smoke and infiltrate some of your own infantry into the structure, preferably from a flank.

2. Supposing they don't have any very dangerous AT weaponry, roll an Abrams up (assuming you have one on call) and simply blow the f***ers away.

3. If neither approach #1 or #2 are practicable, call on some air support to drop laser guided bombs on the structure. If penetrating bunker busters aren't available, as probably they won't, a 2,000 pounder will make a nice hole in the top level. Then you drop another through that hole to blow the next one down, and so forth until you get to the baddies. Unless said baddies are in a hurry to get to Paradise, they might have pulled out before then, allowing the last phases of the bombing to be canceled.

4. If none of the foregoing can be done, toss in some WP and wait for the screams to subside before going in to collect whomever remains.

Michael

[flamingknives]

Well, the Hellfire is 7" and the MLRS is closer to 9" diameter.

Reports on the GMLRS in Iraq have been favourable, as they are an all weather weapon and less overkill than a 2000lb JDAM.

Plus it can be fired by some nice, lightweight MRLS vehicles

Cute little begger isn't it?

Chinook portable, too.

[Dinger]

Mortars -- now we're talking.

Found this excerpted from Oct. 2005 of Army:

PGMM is a laser-guided 120 mm mortar with extended-range glide capability. It has three major subsystems: seeker, projec tile and warhead. The seeker is a low-cost, strap-down laser sensor with superior reliability. The projectile has folded switchblade wings that provide lift and actuatorcontrolled tail fins for controlled flight to the extended range. The glide and endgame maneuverability are achieved without the added weight, cost and complexity of a rocket motor. The warhead will be optimized to defeat threats behind protective cover, such as crew-served weapon stations, command posts and observers used in fortified positions. The ability to take out precision targets in urban environments will be critical in future conflicts.

It's still experimental, and it still requires someone to laze the target.

120mm cartridge weighs about 30 pounds, so maybe half that is HE. (Compare to a 155mm warhead which is something like 98 lbs). The "penetrate targets beneath cover" suggests they're going for a "copperhead light", so expect a smaller charge (155mm CLGP has something like 15 lbs of Comp. that's shaped for penetration. Again, they're going on the philosophy that if it's not in some way hardened, you don't need guidance.

Spotting for Laser-guided artillery is in itself tricky. High-angle is even more so: the seeker has to acquire the lazed target relatively high up -- that means you need to be lazing something where the reflected light is visible from the incoming trajectory, and preferably without haze or cloud cover.

So I'm thinking in their "Dumb" mode, the 120s will be just fine.

[MikeyD]

"Spotting for Laser-guided artillery is in itself tricky."

Any old CM player will tell you the frustration of trying to direct accurate artillery onto something *just* outside of the spotter's LOS. "Ack! Maybe if I move my guy up to the second floor of the next building over I'll get some proper LOS on that mf!"

[Dinger]

Oh yeah, we are talking about CM, aren't we?

You can always find that little square that's "close enough" for area fire. Now try to find that square that's "dead on". Now get that shot lined up. Call it in. Now wait one turn and get the "Angle T Exceeds 500 Mils -- Observer shift your position" message. Repeat.

[Peter Cairns]

Michael Emrys,

If they say use ATGM's from deep on trucks they can shoot and scoot within the structure.

Some Carparks are below larger buildings , possibly residential.

As to WP, well thats fine for the roof, but how much would you need to use for it to drift down two floors, and what would you be able to see.

A lot of modern Concrete buildings have apartments on the top and offices at street level. These offices often have a full sized glass front and concrete floors and sides, making then ideal to hide and shoot and scoot for a flatbed, with almost anything mounted on the back.

I think the ability to use heavy stuff to blast them out might have to give way to men on the ground clearing them shop by shop.

Peter.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

If they say use ATGM's from deep on trucks they can shoot and scoot within the structure.

Would that comprise their entire force? I thought we were talking about a small group of infantry (possibly irregular) armed with AK-47s and a few RPGs. An ATGM mounted on a truck is a lot easier to kill with leg infantry.

Some Carparks are below larger buildings , possibly residential.

Two questions. How common is that going to be in Syria? How easy is it going to be to fire out of one of those? Sounds like it is going to be underground.

As to WP, well thats fine for the roof, but how much would you need to use for it to drift down two floors, and what would you be able to see.

You aren't thinking with me here. I assumed the WP is coming in direct fire. If the bad guys can shoot out, you can shoot in.

A lot of modern Concrete buildings have apartments on the top and offices at street level. These offices often have a full sized glass front and concrete floors and sides, making then ideal to hide and shoot and scoot for a flatbed, with almost anything mounted on the back.

I don't see how you can shoot & scoot with a flatbed unless you have first blown out a lot of interior walls. Seems like you'd have to have blown the glass out if you meant to shoot through it. This just doesn't sound realistic to me at all.

I think the ability to use heavy stuff to blast them out might have to give way to men on the ground clearing them shop by shop.

Well, yeah, if that's the way the building is laid out. When you said "parking structure" I was envisioning the kind I am familiar with, which isn't anything like what you are now describing. I would describe this new thing as an underground garage. Totally different animal.

Michael

[Peter Cairns]

Michael,

My experience is mostly of the med down to about Cyprus, but the use of reinforced concrete seems pretty wide spread ( look at Israel and the Lebaon for example).

Construction tends to be based around a frame of reinforced concrete pillars ( steel reinforing rod, sheathed and filled with concrete, then a supported concrete slab is layed on top of sheathing ply and when its all set and hardened you go on to the next story).

Now once that frame is built internal walls are added made up of either light blockor hollow brick, then rendered. This gives a strong yet light construction.

Now in some cases usually residential the entire ground floor is letf open, just as pillars, acting as a car park. So it's ground as opposed to underground in many cases.

In others as I have said it's offices where the front is all glass. In terms of shoot and scoot, as the glass fronts on the blocks on both sides of the street face each other, the tactic would be to drive half out fire up the street and then drive back in.

The danger would be of someone spotting for a quad 23mm on a 4x4.

I'am also not sure how this strong pillar light wall structure will react to HE hits or the likes of Thermobaric. I could see the block/brick walls rupturing but the structure itself satying pretty much intact till it became a shell.

However if enough columns were hit then like a precast building the whole damned thing could concertina, like a house of cards. How BF will simulate all this I have no idea but it's all very different from your CMx1 two story wooded farm building.

In addition if the internal and rear walls parallel to the glass front are light weight, none load bearing ( the reinforced pillars take the weight and there is no need for insulation) then it shouldn't be a tough job to knock through a hole that will in theory let a jeep go all the way through to the rear courtyard area.

Sometimes these blocks are built as a square with a central courtyard, communal area, with vehicle access,which would be ideal to fire mortars from, making counter battery fire difficult especially if it's residential.

One way in which a 120mm fibre optics morat round could be usefull is by using it's high trajectory to drop in to the square, although the operator would only have seconds to locate and target the offending mortar and guide his round on to it.

I suppose one option would be for the first spotting round to be a dud, that way if it turns out he's buggered off and the square is full of kids, well lets just say. they'll still show the round to the press, but you don't have to live with having wiped out a family.

As to using WP in direct fire mode, well you'd need to fire it to hit the roof and the whole thing is dependant on getting a clear shot in a built up area.

For example if you could rig a SPG-73 on a quad take it to the edge of a carpark and cover a junction, then when the first vehicle came in view you would "Fire anf F**K".

I don't envisage these tactics winning a battle, but as the irregulars would be trying to cause casualties and then get out of the way before effectively engaged it's the kind of thing you'd need to expect.

They would be limited to what they could use, by head height as I don't you could get a BM-21 style MLRS in due to lack of clearance.

Peter.