In the United States experienced a howitzer at a distance of a shot over a hundred kilometers

101
In the United States, high-precision howitzers with a firing range over 100 kilometers have been tested. The tests were carried out in the framework of the ERCA program (Extended Range Cannon Artillery - "Barrel artillery with an increased range), reports "Popular Mechanics".

In the United States experienced a howitzer at a distance of a shot over a hundred kilometers




As the newspaper writes, the shooting took place on the territory of the military ground of Hume in Arizona. On the tests, a modernized self-propelled howitzer Paladin was used, on which they installed an elongated barrel XM907 and used a new XM1113 projectile with a rocket booster. According to the US military, the advantage of such howitzers are significantly increased range and rate of fire, as well as reliability.

The program to create a barreled artillery with increased range of fire appeared in the United States in 2015 year. As part of this program, it was proposed to create a new howitzer with an elongated barrel, a new projectile and a new propelling charge. All components of the ERCA artillery complex received their own working designations: the 155-mm howitzer of the new type - XM907, the controlled active-projectile for it is called XM1113, the propelling charge - XM645. The XM907 cannon was developed based on the M777ER howitzer and differs from it in barrel length (58 gauges instead of 55). In the standard howitzer М777, the length of the barrel is 39 caliber.

Last year, the US military said that they were able to fire a shot with an elongated gun and a projectile to it at a distance of 62 km, calling it a non-limiting value.

You can read more about the American program in the material "Military Outlook": Increase the range of barrel artillery. ERCA Program (USA)

  • https://www.youtube.com/
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

101 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    8 February 2019 14: 27
    Well, how much will the projectile fly to the target? what
    1. +5
      8 February 2019 15: 16
      Quote: adma
      Well, how much will the projectile fly to the target? what

    2. 0
      8 February 2019 15: 44
      And how much will it cost? If like "Zamvolt", then - space!
      1. +3
        8 February 2019 16: 03
        Quote: Zlat070

        And how much will it cost?

        Pennies nothing! Ponty is everything !! fellow
      2. +6
        8 February 2019 16: 19
        Quote: Zlat070
        And how much will it cost?


        M982 Excalibur cost (initially) $ 150 per shot, after "bulk" purchases it costs up to $ 000 per shot
        including M1156 Precision guidance kit costs only 15000d.

        I don't think that
        XM1113 (already without M1156) + XM654 will be more expensive $ 80
        It is cheap for an accurate hit at a range of 70-100 (+) km.

        1 shot solves one problem
    3. 0
      8 February 2019 22: 05
      and how many cc will it carry? there one engine will take a lot of mass and space, and also electronics ... I think 100 grams will fit laughing hi
      1. 0
        10 February 2019 11: 05
        In the article - worthless reasoning.
        No one mentions KVO, no one talks about the resource of the barrel, but everyone understands that this is a cannon of several shots (referring to the firing of a single-kiloton nuclear warhead).
        So the question is: do we need such ammunition for what? To provoke Russia to a nuclear response? Or to make Putin's prediction come true: "Russia will go to heaven, and all of you will just die"?
        Indeed, it may make sense to lay down the doctrine of a preventive nuclear strike on the territory of the United States, use it once and no longer rub your nerves either to yourself or to Europe? Yes, SO use so that for a thousand years ahead no one would even creep into declaring the exclusivity of their nation?
  2. +4
    8 February 2019 14: 27
    In the United States have been tested high-precision howitzers with a firing range of over 100 kilometers.

    Nothing ... Where is the performance characteristics of this high-precision howitzer? What is its rate of fire? The weight? The Germans also had Dora ...
    1. +5
      8 February 2019 14: 54
      In the amount of two pieces - these will have hundreds of them.
      1. +1
        8 February 2019 15: 02
        Quote: Vadim237
        these will have hundreds of them.
        Is not a fact. If the parameters will satisfy, then maybe.
        With such a range, I am sure that GPS cannot be dispensed with. An inertial system is doubtful and accuracy is not that. A high-tech opponent, I think, will know this chip and will take action ...

        Rather, the projectile will be equipped with a homing missile-like homing head.
        1. +2
          8 February 2019 15: 24
          Accuracy depends on the ballistics of the gun, computers for calculating the trajectory and guidance guidance, as well as the design of an aerodynamic projectile.
          1. +8
            8 February 2019 16: 19
            Quote: Vadim237
            Accuracy depends on the ballistics of the gun, computers for calculating the trajectory and guidance guidance, as well as the design of an aerodynamic projectile.
            As well as from the direction and speed of the wind at different heights and distances, atmospheric pressure there, closer to the target. It’s all impossible to accurately measure. Near yourself - yes, but after 50 km you are unlikely to know these parameters, especially with an accuracy of a gust of wind.
        2. +3
          8 February 2019 16: 07
          Quote: iConst
          Rather, the projectile will be equipped with a homing missile-like homing head.

          And the fig ass harmony? GPS will be enough! (for an immovable target, one-figured ... and a movable target during that time will roll away!)
          1. +2
            8 February 2019 16: 22
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            Quote: iConst
            Rather, the projectile will be equipped with a homing missile-like homing head.

            And the fig ass harmony? GPS will be enough! (for an immovable target, one-figured ... and a movable target during that time will roll away!)

            I wrote for good reason
            Quote: iConst
            A high-tech opponent, I think, will know this chip and will take action ...

            Suppressing or distorting GPS is real. Here is a button accordion.
            1. +3
              8 February 2019 16: 59
              Moreover, experiments were carried out on this topic for 16-17 years in the Novorossiysk region, where navigators got their ship’s place via GPS at the Gelendzhik airport and the last news was from Syria about a year ago, where civilian ships could not GPS locations find Cyprus.
              The experiments lasted several hours, disorganizing traffic.
              The MO and GSh did not give clear explanations for this effect ... good
              1. +1
                9 February 2019 16: 19
                During the latest exercises of the NATO Navy in the region of Norway, ours too
                Quote: hydrox
                GPS
                suppressed during the landing operation - the adversaries got lost ... Complained about aggressive Russia ...
                1. 0
                  10 February 2019 11: 07
                  That's right, it was already in a completely combat situation - and what is puffing up is not clear ... request
      2. +1
        8 February 2019 15: 58
        Quote: Vadim237
        In the amount of two pieces - these will have hundreds of them.

        Uh-huh ... unless this supercannon repeats the fate of the Zamvolta cannon. There were also excellent performance characteristics, but they were bought at such a price that the Navy refused to pay it.
    2. +14
      8 February 2019 14: 59
      Adjustable shell does not require a high rate of fire. This is not infantry support, it is purely a sniper tool destroying the location of the radar, base stations and everything very centralized.
    3. -2
      8 February 2019 15: 28
      Quote: ROSS 42
      You can read more about the American program in the article "Military Review": Increasing the range of cannon artillery. ERCA Program (USA)

      and until the end of the article to read poorly?
      You can read more about the American program in the article "Military Review": Increasing the range of cannon artillery. ERCA Program (USA)
    4. +5
      8 February 2019 16: 12
      Quote: ROSS 42
      Where is the performance characteristics of this precision howitzer?

      howitzer M777ER

      Grooves have been added to the outside of the barrel so Picatinny engineers can hang the weights in different positions, allowing them to move the center of gravity of the weapon forward or backward.
      characteristics of the base M777A

      weight 4200 kg (9 lbs)
      length: 10,7 m (35 ft 1 in)
      transport length 9,5 m (31 ft 2 in)
      Barrel length 5,08 m (16,7 ft) / L39
      M777ER
      weight 4650 kg (10 lbs)
      Barrel length 6,88 m (16,7 ft) / L52

      everything was mounted on the artillery system M109A7 (is a Paladin self-propelled howitzer).

      goal:
      Is it possible to upgrade all M777A2 (and in general all 155mm artillery) to this level, or whether it is necessary to make a new system.


      + new automatic loader
      + new fire control system.
      XM654 supercharge new metal for him

      XM1113 uses jet thrust technology (RD). Higher performance rocket engine provides almost three times the amount of traction compared to outdated
      M549A1 (HE-RAP)

      Weight without fuse 96 lbs (43,6 kg)
      Fuse length 34,4 inches max. (874 mm)
      Case Material Forged Steel
      color olive drab with yellow markings
      Explosive B-in0 TNT, 15 lbs. (6,8 kg)
      Rocket engine 2-component mixed propellant, 6,5 kg. (2,9 kg)

      packaging Wooden pallet of 8 shells

      Temperature limits
      + 145˚F (+ 63˚C) / -50˚F (-46˚C)
      Storage: +160˚F (+71˚C)/ -65˚F (-54˚C)
    5. +2
      8 February 2019 20: 24
      Quote: ROSS 42
      The Germans also had Dora ...
      Dora and Gustav - 807 + mm caliber and range of 40 km.
      Here is the "Paris Cannon" (Colossal) - yes: aimed shooting at the city from 130 km without any rockets ...
    6. -1
      9 February 2019 00: 21
      They caught themselves. In the old, old Soviet times, it was called. "Actively rocket projectile". Did the Americans come up with something new? laughing
  3. +5
    8 February 2019 14: 34
    It is difficult now to assess the benefits of such an invention, if applied in local conflicts without a counteraction density, then it can quite successfully be applied to stationary objects at a decent distance.
    1. +1
      8 February 2019 14: 46
      Isn't it easier to launch a "racket" on a single target?
      1. +8
        8 February 2019 14: 54
        A rocket is expensive.
        1. +1
          8 February 2019 15: 05
          Quote: Vadim237
          A rocket is expensive.
          Yes, figurative for tactical purposes. :)
        2. 0
          8 February 2019 15: 59
          Quote: Vadim237
          A rocket is expensive.

          Remember - how much does a shot of a Zamvolt cannon cost? wink
        3. +1
          8 February 2019 16: 11
          Quote: Vadim237
          A rocket is expensive.

          A guided artillery projectile with electronics is an order of magnitude more difficult than in a "cheap" rocket? belay
        4. +1
          8 February 2019 16: 14
          And that howitzer is not worth anything? And the projectile takes off by itself? By the way, the cannons are also fired with "rockets", which are corrected in flight.
      2. 0
        8 February 2019 15: 29
        Quote: alexneg

        Isn't it easier to launch a "racket" on a single target?

        the price of a "shell" blank and a "high-tech product" rocket?
        1. +9
          8 February 2019 15: 36
          Quote: widower
          the price of a blank "shell"

          .... will be higher than a rocket. For it will be the same guided missile, but with significant limitations in size, much higher requirements for strength and the ability to withstand overloads
          1. +1
            8 February 2019 15: 59
            Quote: Spade
            will be higher than a rocket

            so am I about it
            I put the wrong signs.
            I put the shell and rocket in brackets.
            the meaning is different
      3. 0
        8 February 2019 20: 50
        Quote: alexneg
        Isn't it easier to launch a "racket" on a single target?
        Long-range SRZO?
  4. +9
    8 February 2019 14: 35
    As I understand it, the keyword is "rocket booster" and the projectile is a rocket ejected from the barrel with a powder charge. That is, this kind of hybrid weapon is at the junction of classic artillery and missiles.
    1. +5
      8 February 2019 14: 53
      Yes. A shell like our Krasnopol.
      1. 0
        8 February 2019 15: 43
        So why then are such expenses on the trunk, and so on, when the RS is many times simpler and cheaper, in the tip and loss at the same prices and limits, and on the warhead the RS can be different and many times more powerful. To destroy several targets with precision ammunition, it is better to use based on RS shells. High-precision target destruction, in terms of maneuverability, price and accuracy of the RS system, out of competition with the barreled artillery, has the advantage of large-scale shooting over areas
        1. +3
          8 February 2019 15: 59
          A rocket of a similar size and dimensions, fired not from the trunk, will not be able to fly so far even with a fair wind. The very moment of the shot from the barrel is a powerful starting impulse. The thing is not stupid at all. The price of our Kargopol certainly bites, $ 35.000 - the money is not small. But they, nevertheless, are now willingly taken by Indians and Chinese.
          1. +1
            8 February 2019 16: 42
            Errr ... I disagree, in mass production, the use of high-precision PCs is several times cheaper than art. Systems. The gain in fuel mass is negligible in terms of prices. In terms of range, you are disingenuous, the PC is also out of competition. It is necessary to prudently approach the problem of high-precision defeats and area targets for artillery (mobile small-scale mass targets, infantry, and pinpoint large targets). When the enemy is "smeared" over the area, the art system is the first number in suppression. On point targets, PC is out of competition. Conclusion: Introduce systems for high-precision destruction of RS (high-precision RS Smerch and others) in the divisions of art systems ... In my opinion, today there is no understanding in the development of universal complex systems for defeating the enemy, either art. system, or PC, and create versatility. then the solution of all tasks will be distributed and simplified for a given combat unit. ..
            1. 0
              8 February 2019 19: 27
              Those. Do you propose creating a comprehensive missile and artillery system, as it were, modeled on tanks + self-propelled anti-tank systems?
              1. +1
                8 February 2019 19: 43
                Errr ... Life and experience are the main judge, so maybe you need to try to create a multi-level combat unit with many tasks. It is advisable to break in in combat conditions (Syria, etc.). Time is rapidly changing everything, including the tactics of military operations, and a comprehensive art division for many tasks, as a center of influence on the battlefield, a possible solution ..
                1. 0
                  9 February 2019 05: 47
                  It could even be.
                  “When a person is born, he is weak and flexible, when he dies, he is strong and hard. When a tree grows, it is soft and flexible, and when it is dry and hard, it dies. Hardness and strength are companions of death, flexibility and weakness express the freshness of being. Therefore, what is solidified will not win. "
                  Lao-tzu, "Tao te ching".
          2. +4
            8 February 2019 17: 01
            Quote: Herrr
            The price of our Kargopol certainly bites, $ 35.000 - the money is not small.

            There is "Centimeter", which is much simpler and therefore cheaper. It does not have aerodynamic rudders, booster bottom gas generator (engine) and control mechanics. Uses several impulse engines (pyro charges) directed to the sides to change the trajectory (correction). Used by the USSR in Afghanistan.
            1. +1
              8 February 2019 19: 13
              Just came across this article:
              http://www.dogswar.ru/boepripasy/snariady-rakety/7729-kompleks-korrektirye.html
              Interested in.
            2. 0
              9 February 2019 04: 55
              Quote: Genry
              Uses several pulsed motors (pyro charges),

              What are "pyro charges"? Used impulse rocket (!) Micromotors or micromotors with "impulse" shooting "ballast weight" (BG) ... (you can call: "impulse BG-micromotors" ...)
              1. 0
                9 February 2019 15: 03
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                Used impulse rocket (!) Micromotors or micromotors with "impulse" shooting "ballast weight" (BG) ... (you can call: "impulse BG-micromotors" ...)

                Follow the link from a friend to read and do not disgrace.
  5. +3
    8 February 2019 14: 40
    I wonder what exactly will be at such a distance ..
    1. +1
      8 February 2019 15: 06
      When firing a projectile M982 Excalibur KVO about 10 m. This can be read here:
      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur
      Specifically, the projectile XM1113 has not yet found information.
      1. -1
        8 February 2019 15: 25
        Well this one will have 13 meters.
    2. 0
      11 February 2019 08: 48
      Taking into account the shift of GPS coordinates by +/- 50m due to electronic warfare countermeasures. And against the "Papuans with spears" you can smoke the manufacturer's advertising brochures, but "2 write, 7 in the mind."
  6. 0
    8 February 2019 14: 43
    I wonder what the breech of the gun is, if it’s self-propelled, it’s probably without a tower.
    They planned to install something similar on their newest destroyers, but there the shell was the size of a rocket and, in order to load the gun, the barrel was lifted 180 degrees. But there is a ship.
  7. 0
    8 February 2019 14: 43
    Quote: Roman070280
    I wonder what exactly will be at such a distance ..

    Why a howitzer per 100 km?
    1. +2
      8 February 2019 15: 19
      Quote: To be or not to be
      Why a howitzer per 100 km?

      It seems to me that to support the DRG operating in the enemy’s deep rear, where it is relaxed and does not expect artillery fire, and is covered by air defense systems from a missile attack and airstrikes.
      1. +1
        8 February 2019 17: 59
        Quote: Polite Moose
        Quote: To be or not to be
        Why a howitzer per 100 km?

        It seems to me that to support the DRG operating in the enemy’s deep rear, where it is relaxed and does not expect artillery fire, and is covered by air defense systems from a missile attack and airstrikes.

        Not only. Shooting at the concentration of the reserve forces of the enemy, at the warehouses, at the military air defense, etc.
    2. +4
      8 February 2019 15: 38
      Quote: To be or not to be
      Quote: Roman070280
      I wonder what exactly will be at such a distance ..

      Why a howitzer per 100 km?

      In order to build the budget for the headstock. Well, then, when nothing really works out, give up on dope. Moreover, cheaper rockets capable of performing these tasks already exist.
    3. +1
      8 February 2019 17: 04
      Quote: To be or not to be
      Why a howitzer per 100 km?

      Much faster and cheaper than using attack aircraft.
      1. -1
        8 February 2019 21: 46
        Who knows. This howitzer without protection will not last long, here you need as an AUG, one aircraft carrier and a dozen destroyers along with a submarine. But there is a whole aircraft carrier, and here it's just a howitzer, albeit a wunder.
  8. +7
    8 February 2019 14: 43
    The only question is the price ... range, accuracy, reliability is such a counterweight against just a projectile, it pulls the price eleven times!
    By the way, what does the rate of fire have to do with it ??? Can someone afford to bullet over expensive shells with machine gun intensity? Yeah, szachz-zz, there will be unit shots at special goals! Then yeah, you can believe it will happen.
    1. +1
      8 February 2019 14: 52
      Quote: rocket757

      The only question is the price ... range, accuracy, reliability is such a counterweight against just a projectile, it pulls the price eleven times!
      By the way, what does the rate of fire have to do with it ??? Can someone afford to bullet over expensive shells with machine gun intensity?

      good and the question arises - will it not be cheaper to shoot missiles (the same MLRS)? worked out option - the same "Tornado", "HIMARS" or WS-1B
      https://topwar.ru/9792-top-pyaterka-reaktivnyh-sistem-zalpovogo-ognya-otechestvennogo-i-zarubezhnogo-proizvodstva.html
      1. +6
        8 February 2019 15: 04
        Just hit the projectile, reflect, it must still learn! With a missile shell, the situation is not yet clear.
        In general, there is a lot of fog and advertising, and how it really will be is incomprehensible!
        One thing is clear, it will be much more expensive! And all the other advantages, it is still necessary to prove, show !!!
        In general, it does not seem that this plan, for a real war, is very doubtful.
      2. 0
        8 February 2019 17: 14
        Quote: self-propelled
        and the question arises - will it not be cheaper to shoot missiles (the same MLRS)? the option worked out


        MLRS designed for unexpected, massive strikes over a large area. The size and weight of the missiles is much larger than the size of the shells per kilogram of delivered explosives, they are too expensive in production due to the amount of spent materials per missile and subsequent delivery (especially by aviation) and storage (especially in sheltered shelters). During the deployed hostilities, you just need to suppress single enemy firing points and firing at squares with expensive missiles, not at all necessary.
      3. 0
        8 February 2019 17: 47
        Quote: self-propelled
        and the question arises - will it not be cheaper to shoot missiles (the same MLRS)? worked out option - the same "Tornado", "HIMARS" or WS-1B

        GMLRS, which is used by both marines and the army, the price ranges from 100 to 000 dollars per shot.
        ATACMS, launched from the same HIMARS and MLRS launchers, costs between $ 750 and $ 000.

        M270 MLRS costs 2.3 million $
        M142 HIMARS costs 5.1 million $
        So count
        M549A1 (HE-RAP) costs $ 70, the XM000 is unlikely to be more expensive

        purchase of 30 PIM systems: (SPH) M109A7 + M992A3 CAT

        by LRIP in 2016 in the amount of 273,9 million USD

        273,9 million dollars: 30 = 9,31 million dollars (howitzer + FAASV)
        LRIP will end: - 30%
        ===============================
        About cheap rockets ...
        mmm I can’t even understand the logic of who is spreading this nonsense.

        In 2012, the cost of one rocket
        AGM-114 Hellfire II for the US Army amounted to 70-90 thousand US dollars
        AGM-114R - from 94 thousand dollars
        so it’s air surface and only 7,1 to 11 km

        In the early 2000s years, the Grada shell cost from 6 to 8,5 thousand rubles, and a more complex one, equipped with an AR-6 remote radio fuse, cost 35 thousand rubles

        one shell of the heavier 240 mm "Hurricane" in those years It cost from 193 to 354 thousand rubles, and the 300-mm “Smerch” - from 1,8 to 2,2 million rubles.
        / Now it can be safely * 2
        "Shot" "Iskander": The cost of the 9M723K5 missile of the 9K720 "Iskander-M" complex as of 2009 according to unconfirmed reports 123.192.439 rub
        in 2014 or 13 there was a report said and 108 million rubles (there was a decrease in value)
        The dollar was 30-35 rubles
        Consider cheaper
        1. +3
          8 February 2019 20: 20
          Quote: Aibolit
          About cheap rockets ...
          mmm I can’t even understand the logic of who is spreading this nonsense.

          So with the fact that a rocket is more expensive than a conventional projectile no one argues. Cast iron is always cheaper. smile

          But here the shell is clearly non-standard. How much will a projectile (more precisely, a shot) cost for a firing range of 100 km, and even ensuring acceptable hit accuracy at this range?

          And as soon as we talk about such shells, the first thing that comes to mind is the infamous LRLAP for AGS, costing up to 1 megabax apiece (155-mm shell costing a "tomahawk" belay ).
          1. -1
            8 February 2019 21: 15
            Quote: Alexey RA
            But here the shell is clearly non-standard. How much will a projectile (more precisely, a shot) cost for a firing range of 100 km, and even ensuring acceptable hit accuracy at this range?

            I wrote above
            Quote: Aibolit
            M982 Excalibur cost (initially) $ 150 per shot, after "bulk" purchases it costs up to $ 000 per shot
            including M1156 Precision guidance kit costs only 15000d.


            I don't think that
            XM1113 (already without M1156) + XM654 will be more expensive $ 80
            It is cheap for an accurate hit at a range of 70-100 (+) km.

            Quote: Alexey RA
            to mind - this is the infamous LRLAP for AGS costing up to 1 megabyte

            it's not that
            in connection with the reduction of the order for ships of the Zamvolt type to three units (which also reduced the expected output of ammunition),the cost of such a projectile, taking into account the specific share of development costs reaches 800 thousand dollars.
        2. -1
          8 February 2019 20: 52
          Quote: Aibolit
          The dollar was 30-35 rubles
          Consider cheaper

          It is necessary to compare rockets with the comparable power of ammunition. You still compare your miracle shell with the cost of the Soyuz launch vehicle.
          1. -1
            8 February 2019 21: 12
            Quote: KaPToC
            It is necessary to compare rockets with the comparable power of ammunition.

            so compare! What organs interfere with "dancing"?
            I compared
            Quote: Aibolit
            In 2012, the cost of one rocket
            AGM-114 Hellfire II for the US Army was 70-90 thousand US dollars
            AGM-114R - from 94 thousand dollars
            so it’s air surface and only 7,1 to 11 km
  9. +1
    8 February 2019 14: 49
    Great howitzer. I think that everything is fine there with accuracy.
    Interesting is another.
    How much does such a shell cost? And when do we get such things?
    1. -2
      8 February 2019 15: 07
      What's the point in it? Just to say "we also have"?
    2. 0
      8 February 2019 15: 08
      Why do we need such a shell_? It will be cheaper to cover the territory with nurses
      1. +1
        8 February 2019 17: 26
        Quote: yustas
        Why do we need such a shell_? It will be cheaper to cover the territory with nurses

        While helicopters or attack aircraft reach the target, an enemy firing point or armored vehicles will do a lot of trouble.
        Artillery to solve the problem in a couple of minutes, with less shells and without the cost of gluttonous aircraft.
    3. +5
      8 February 2019 15: 09
      The shell will cost like a rocket because this rocket is, only in the role of a launcher using a gun barrel.
    4. 0
      8 February 2019 15: 14
      Tashkent (Konstantin) Today, 14:49
      -1
      An excellent howitzer ... I think that with accuracy there = SER = Circular Probable Deviation (CVO) is an indicator of the accuracy of a bomb, missile, ... CEP (from Circular Error Probable)
      .... "" "• XM1113 Extended Range Artillery r
      edesigned to achieve 1200m / s muzzle velocity with a 20m CEP ... ""
    5. +2
      8 February 2019 15: 35
      We already have a guided projectile Krasnopol:
      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Краснополь_(управляемый_снаряд)
      It costs 35 American kilobax. Its US counterpart to the M982 Excalibur costs from $ 160.000 in the cheap to $ 232.000 in the expensive.
      1. +3
        8 February 2019 16: 05
        Quote: Herrr
        We already have a guided projectile Krasnopol:
        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Краснополь_(управляемый_снаряд)
        It costs 35 American kilobax. Its US counterpart to the M982 Excalibur

        "Krasnopol" should be highlighted. The M982 control system is combined - satellite (GPS) and inertial.
        1. +1
          8 February 2019 17: 31
          Quote: kapitan92
          "Krasnopol" should be highlighted. The M982 control system is combined - satellite (GPS) and inertial.

          All the same, you need to highlight a specific target either from a drone or other intelligence.
        2. +1
          8 February 2019 18: 58
          You are absolutely right. A laser designator is attached to Krasnopol. In this regard, the M982 is more convenient - you can aim firing beyond the line of sight, i.e. Over the horizon. Is it possible to install a Krasnopol laser designator on a drone? I do not know that. There is an interesting article mentioning the Russian-American "cooperation" in the development of this type of weapons in the 90s of the last century:
          http://www.dogswar.ru/boepripasy/snariady-rakety/7729-kompleks-korrektirye.html
    6. +1
      8 February 2019 20: 54
      Quote: Tashkent
      Great howitzer. I think that everything is fine there with accuracy.

      With accuracy there is definitely not all right.
      Quote: Tashkent
      How much does such a shell cost?

      For example, the electronics of a projectile will be more expensive than the electronics of a rocket at times, because it should be more resistant to overloads.
      1. +2
        9 February 2019 06: 16
        A projectile when fired from a howitzer experiences an overload of about 16.000 g. To say that it is not sickly means to say nothing. It seems that the electronics there are really extra class. Apparently, this is also the reason why even our Krasnopol costs $ 35.000, and American Excalibur is almost 5-7 times more expensive (depending on version).
  10. +3
    8 February 2019 14: 50
    Strange canoe. Of course, it can shoot at a firing range in ideal conditions over long distances, and even get somewhere, but in combat conditions ... You’ll get tired of the amendments.
    1. +1
      8 February 2019 14: 57
      At such a range, only highly accurate guided ammunition. Normal shells at such a range would be plus or minus a kilometer,
      1. +3
        8 February 2019 15: 06
        Of course, only manageable. But the point then to upgrade the ancient "Paladin"?

        It's easier to shy away from MLRS, and self-propelled guns to be used for their intended purpose, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.
    2. +1
      8 February 2019 15: 00
      Quote: Lieutenant Senior
      Strange canoe. Of course, it can shoot at a firing range in ideal conditions over long distances, and even get somewhere, but in combat conditions ... You’ll get tired of the amendments.

      Strange logic. You might think that there are switches for "clear weather", "no wind", "turning off the rotation of the Earth" on the test site and the calculations of corrections are carried out according to the manual for the second class)).
      1. +2
        8 February 2019 15: 09
        But is there an enemy switch \ switch in combat conditions that fire at you with all urine, and you need to aim from this canoe and it is advisable to get somewhere?))
        1. -1
          8 February 2019 22: 37
          "who fire at you with all their urine," ////
          ---
          70-100 km? From what it is possible to conduct "rapid fire from all urine"? smile
  11. +1
    8 February 2019 15: 01
    Poor "automatic loader", you will not envy))
  12. 0
    8 February 2019 15: 08
    155 mm LRLAP guided ultra-long shells at the price of 800+ kilobax production were already ... I doubt very much that the shell here is very cheap .... which means they will play and set aside.
    1. 0
      8 February 2019 15: 30
      Yes, the same "Krasnopol" with GPS guidance
  13. -1
    8 February 2019 15: 16
    Given that on the American continent, no one thinks and is not going to fight with the United States (not to anyone), participation in military conflicts is based on carpet bombing and rocket attacks (by the fleet), but you won’t get enough of the mass shelling with this toy, conclusion One: - This is a commercial product designed and manufactured for sale. Thank God (for them) they have someone to vparivat this and NATO as well.
    1. +1
      8 February 2019 22: 41
      This new product is for the US Army only.
      Americans always use artillery heavily in ground operations: in both Iraqi wars, the M-109 worked 100%.
  14. +1
    8 February 2019 15: 50
    I would like details about the resource of the barrel .. And how often and quickly it will have to be changed.
  15. +1
    8 February 2019 16: 19
    Shot range over 100 km? Well ... okay! What kind of perversions we have not seen! No. For big money, any whim! And how much will it cost ... what is the efficiency ... how many shots the barrel will last ... how much space will remain in the projectile for the BB-Duc, this is the 2nd plan ... the costs of a wonderful "innovative" idea!
  16. 0
    8 February 2019 16: 40
    Something I have already heard, but in the ship's version. There are guns, test frames on the shore - too. But all together - an instrument for testing at least on a ship ... Only cartoons are too expensive and SAIL without shells
    1. +2
      8 February 2019 20: 23
      Quote: Cowbra
      Something I have already heard, but in the ship's version.

      Cannon AGS and projectile LRLAP. The guns are on "irons". No shells - because the USN is not ready to shell out 0,8-1 megabax for one shell. laughing
      1. 0
        9 February 2019 08: 32
        Without shells

        winked
  17. Kaw
    0
    8 February 2019 17: 05
    When we bring our Coalition to mass production, it will already be possible to put it in the museum.
    1. 0
      9 February 2019 00: 09
      Yes, I saw, for example, HERE, a person who knows how to "exhaust" was checked. Well, very hello, I forgot for a kopeck piece, and odin callsign. We live and take out the atru. And they are kamikaze
  18. 0
    8 February 2019 19: 45
    And why do you need to shoot a gun at 100 km? -Decided to surpass "Kolosal"? laughing -and how did they increase reliability? -by what? laughing
  19. +2
    8 February 2019 20: 36
    Quote: Kaw
    When we bring our Coalition to mass production, it will already be possible to put it in the museum.

    I just wanted to write it) I pulled it out of my mouth)) while they have no analogue, they are already bye bye, but there is something to ride in the parade and show in the military acceptance) and so Msta, t72 be satisfied)
  20. 0
    8 February 2019 21: 11
    the range is good, but how much space was left for explosives, or will one corps reach the target?
  21. 0
    9 February 2019 00: 46
    As I understand it, you need to shoot at 100 km - a barrel of 58 calibers, a special projectile, a special throwing charge. The question is how many such trunks will be at the forefront what ? What goals do you want to hit what what ? A sniper with a long-range rifle himself walks behind the target, a long-range self-propelled gun will ride along the front for the target what ? Now the United States is betting on UAVs - is the rate changing? soldier
  22. 0
    12 February 2019 08: 19
    wassat wassat

    Unfinished ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"