BAE Systems is developing a promising 155-mm NGAA artillery shell

24
BAE Systems is developing a promising 155-mm NGAA artillery shell
Promotional cutaway image of the NGAA projectile


The UK and other NATO countries are facing dwindling stockpiles of artillery shells and are planning to replenish them. In this regard, BAE Systems began developing a new 155-mm projectile with the code NGAA. In terms of tactical and technical characteristics, it will not be inferior to current ammunition, and its production will be simpler and cheaper, which will speed up and reduce the cost of rebuilding arsenals.



Perspective development


On September 12-15, the military-technical exhibition DSEI-2023 was held in London. One of its main participants has traditionally been the international corporation BAE Systems, which presented a number of already known and completely new models. In particular, its British branch BAE Systems Land UK, specializing in ground systems, presented the NGAA (Next Generation Adaptable Ammunition) artillery projectile project.

The NGAA projectile and its future variants are being created as a promising replacement for the British L15 family of ammunition. It will also be able to replace shells of other models that meet NATO standards. It is expected that the NGAA will be of interest not only to the British, but also to foreign armies that have the appropriate weapons.

BAE Systems reports that the NGAA project takes into account the operating experience of the current generation of projectiles, as well as the current problems of the NATO ammunition industry and proposes solutions for them. Due to a number of new design and technological ideas, it is planned to reduce the cost of a serial projectile by 50% or more in comparison with current L15 products. They are also going to develop an electronic fuse that will cost no more than current mechanical ones.


BAE Systems is currently engaged in design work, and the new projectile has so far been demonstrated only in the form of graphic materials. They plan to show finished experimental products by the end of the year. Fire tests aimed at confirming the design characteristics should begin soon after this.

How long the testing and fine-tuning of the new projectile will continue has not yet been clarified. It is likely that test firing and design refinement will take at least several months, and the projectile will be ready for production only after 2024-25.

Technical appearance


According to published materials, the NGAA project envisages the creation of a 155-mm artillery shell of a traditional appearance. Externally and in architecture it will not differ fundamentally from existing L15 products, etc. Due to this, full continuity and compatibility with weapons of NATO standards will be ensured. The maximum diameter of the product is 155 mm, length is approx. 780 mm (without fuse).

The body shape is traditional. The NGAA will retain an elongated ogive head, a cylindrical central section with a leading belt on the outside, and a truncated cone-shaped bottom. A fuse of an existing or future model will be screwed into the head part. The main part of the body will accommodate a charge of one type or another, and a gas generator or a small-sized solid propellant engine will be located in the bottom.


First of all, it is planned to create a high-explosive fragmentation projectile. Its body can accommodate up to 10-12 kg of explosives. The possibility of developing smoke and illumination ammunition with new pyrotechnic compositions is being explored. In the future, jammer shells and other special-purpose products may appear.

An electronic programmable fuse, e-Fuze, is being developed for the NGAA. This device, screwed into the head of the projectile, will detonate at a given point in time or upon impact with the target. In the future, it is planned to create a modification of the e-Fuze for 127 mm naval artillery shells.

The combat characteristics of the new family of projectiles will remain at the level of the current L15. When using a gun with a barrel length of 52 klb, a projectile with a gas generator will fly 40 km, an active-reactive one – 65 km. Accuracy indicators will remain at the level of predecessors.

New approaches


One of the main goals of the NGAA project is to reduce the cost and complexity of mass production of projectiles and fuses for them. In this regard, a new approach to the selection of materials, technologies and components has been proposed. BAE Systems found an opportunity to partially abandon military standards and optimize production technologies.


British-made 155 mm L15 family projectiles

It is proposed to manufacture the projectile body in the form of one part, rather than assemble it from several. This will significantly simplify the production of cases and make them less expensive. In addition, the body is going to be made from “commercial” grades of steel instead of special “military” grades. Due to this, they want to expand the circle of potential suppliers of raw materials to create competition, reduce prices and increase the reliability of supplies. It is also necessary to reduce the role of special technological equipment so that more contractors can be involved in production.

A new explosive formulation is being developed for the basic NGAA high-explosive fragmentation projectile. This work should be completed by the end of this year. In the production of new explosives, Resonance acoustic mixing technology will be used, which will significantly speed up the technological process. Pyrotechnic compositions based on “new generation red phosphorus” New Generation Red Phosphorus are also being developed.

The e-Fuze electronic fuze will also be simple and cheap. It intends to use commercially available components that meet the design loads and other requirements, but have a limited cost. It is expected that in mass production such a fuse will be no more expensive than a standard mechanical one.

In general, it is proposed to abandon specialized “military” solutions and widely use technologies and equipment available outside the ammunition industry. This approach will allow a wider range of enterprises to be involved in the production of projectiles, obtaining the required production rates and costs. At the same time, it will be possible to quickly increase the production of shells and cover the needs of customers.


Cartridges with propellant charge used on AS-90 self-propelled guns

Problems and solutions


Since last spring, Britain and other NATO countries have supplied the Kyiv regime with more than 2 million 155mm shells, not counting other ammunition. Shells were being pulled out of stock and supplies were reducing available stock. Now it is necessary to replenish its own arsenals as quickly as possible, as well as create reserves for new supplies to Ukraine. The only way out of this situation is to launch full-scale production capable of covering all the needs for shells.

Last year it became known that the military-industrial complex of European countries has limited production capabilities. Its ammunition industry simply cannot cope with the production of the required number of shells in a reasonable time. Restoring the necessary capacity and reaching the required pace is a separate problem.

In such a situation, non-standard solutions are required, and BAE Systems Land UK offers a way out of this situation. Its new NGAA project provides for serious optimization of the design and production technologies of the projectile. At the same time, it is believed that the main characteristics can be maintained at the level of existing samples or even improved.

In general, the ideas of the NGAA project look interesting and are capable of solving the assigned tasks, ensuring the expansion of production. However, it is unclear whether all these solutions can be implemented within the current British industry or with the involvement of European contractors. It cannot be excluded that enterprises from outside the ammunition industry will not be able to quickly master the necessary production, and this will become an additional problem.

According to the information announced, the NGAA projectile will be tested next year. The tests will be completed no earlier than 2024-25. This means that mass production, even in the absence of any new problems and difficulties, will only be able to start in 2025 or later. What will happen to British and NATO artillery by this time is a big question. And BAE Systems, together with potential buyers, no longer have the opportunity to waste time without benefit and real results.
24 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -3
    22 September 2023 03: 55
    Everything is still just being developed, but they already know that production will be cheaper without producing a single one.
    In general, it would be interesting to know whether we are even developing new artillery ammunition, or will this complicate logistics and force someone to retrain, which means we don’t need it?
    1. KCA
      +2
      22 September 2023 04: 27
      At a minimum, they are developing shells and charges for the Coalition-SV, the shells and charges are not compatible with standard 152mm, this is what is officially known, no information has come across about ordinary ones, maybe it’s secret, or maybe they just don’t consider it important to inform
      1. +3
        22 September 2023 10: 03
        Quote: KCA
        They are developing for the Coalition-SV, the shells and charges are not compatible with standard 152mm

        IMHO you are confusing something, with shells (but not charges!) there cannot but be backward compatibility with older systems. I’m ready to eat my cocked hat that this was the first requirement of the Ministry of Defense in the terms of reference for the Coalition. Maybe the new shells developed specifically for the Coalition are not compatible with the Soviet standard, such as those of Msta, for example in length, but in theory they should be suitable for Msta.
        1. 0
          22 September 2023 10: 18
          Quote: Passing by
          there can be no backward compatibility with older systems.

          News from a world where shells for Hyacinth, Msta and D-20 fit together.
          1. +1
            22 September 2023 16: 58
            Quote: Negro
            Hyacinth, Mste and D-20

            I’m not so immersed in the topic, maybe I don’t understand something, but in public sources the continuity of the ML20-D1-D20-Acacia-Msta shells is clearly indicated. Specifically, Msta uses standard shell indexes for Acacia, which is certainly compatible with D-20 and lower. And even moreover, for Hyacinth the projectile indices Centimeter and Krasnopol coincide with Msta. That is, unless I'm missing some nuance, both branches of howitzers use the same guided projectiles. And something tells me that Hyacinth, if he really wants to, can fire shells from the main line of Soviet 152 mm shells, at least with a reduced charge, the only firing tables are that they need different ones.
            Everything suggests that the Coalition can normally use any projectile from the main line of Soviet howitzers, because the Coalition’s propellant charges are modular, there is no need to remove their cartridges by hand, and even from Hyacinth can most likely be adapted if desired.
            1. +2
              22 September 2023 18: 51
              Quote: Passing by
              Everything suggests that the Coalition can normally use any projectile from the main line of Soviet howitzers, because the Coalition’s propellant charges are modular, there is no need to remove their cartridges by hand, and even from Hyacinth can most likely be adapted if desired.

              )))
              OK, let's leave this conversation. It is better to conduct it with a specialist. And certainly not with me - I don’t believe in the existence of the “Coalition” in its “known from sources” form.
            2. +2
              23 September 2023 20: 29
              Quote: Passing by
              Everything suggests that the Coalition can normally use any projectile from the main line of Soviet howitzers, because the Coalition’s propellant charges are modular, there is no need to remove their cartridges by hand, and even from Hyacinth can most likely be adapted if desired.

              Everything is exactly the opposite - the Coalition cannot use shells from previous systems. This is precisely what is causing the delay in its adoption - it was necessary to first organize the production of these shells. But probably more advanced and aerodynamic projectiles from the Coalition will be able to be used by Msta and Hyotsinth. And this can increase the range and accuracy of their fire.
              1. +1
                24 September 2023 16: 54
                Quote: bayard
                Everything is exactly the opposite - the Coalition cannot use shells from previous systems

                Is it possible to have a proof? I dug into the internet and found it only in the primary sources, i.e. statements by a Tekhmash representative that new shells developed specifically for the Coalition began to be tested only in 2020, with a completion date of 2022. How does this indicate that the Coalition is not compatible with old shells? And what has the Coalition been shooting at all these years, starting in 2015? It’s hard to believe that self-propelled guns were developed, produced in the amount of 12, but they forgot about the shells, and five years later they remembered that there was nothing to test the self-propelled guns with... IMHO, they tested all this time with old shells.
                1. +1
                  25 September 2023 13: 56
                  Quote: Passing by
                  statements by a Tekhmash representative that new shells developed specifically for the Coalition began to be tested only in 2020, with a completion date of 2022.

                  That’s right, the tests of the “Coalition” began with shells from “Msta”, but then it was finally decided that the weapon could reveal its full potential only with new shells specially designed for it. The first small batches were produced in pilot production, then the question arose (when the first firing confirmed the calculations) about organizing the actual production of these shells. These capacities have been created. And now “Coalition-SV” has gone into wide production, because the self-propelled gun itself has been completed, and the production of shells for it has been established in sufficient volumes.
                  So I will formulate it a little more correctly than above. "Coalition-SV" can use shells from "Msta", but the calculated/declared characteristics are not achieved. We need projectiles with more advanced aerodynamics and overall design. That is why the launch of the Coalition-SV series was somewhat delayed. And there were several reasons for this delay:
                  - it was necessary to build and organize the production of shells for the “Coalition”,
                  - it was necessary to prepare a new line for assembling the “Coalition-SV” itself in a new building, because those that exist are now busy upgrading the entire Msta-S fleet to SM,
                  - and it was necessary to finalize the actual design of the “Coalition-SV”, complete testing and fine-tuning of its chassis.
                  All this required time, so the launch into series was delayed in favor of modernizing as many Msta-S as possible. Well, the production of new shells had to proceed ahead of schedule in order to create a quantitative reserve. Because without shells the self-propelled gun is useless.
                  And yes - the development and testing of the guided Krasnopol-D was completed.
                  The production of new types of projectiles is carried out without prejudice to the production of previous types of projectiles at new production facilities. In addition, there are also supplies of standard 152 and 122 mm shells. already coming from North Korea. Soon there will be a lot of things and it will be fun.
        2. +1
          23 September 2023 06: 52
          This topic has already been discussed on this resource...
          https://topwar.ru/214587-prosim-otpravit-v-zonu-specoperacii-sau-koalicija-sv-a-streljat-iz-nee-chem-budem.html
      2. 0
        23 September 2023 18: 16
        Well, the charges there will be different and the chamber there will be much larger and the type of detonation there will seem to be different, but what kind of shells will be incompatible? The coalition itself can definitely work with standard shells; for the coalition they are working on Krasnopol-D, which is actually an analogue of Excalibur, but it can also work with places and acacia. What new shells are there that the pre-gesifiers will not be able to work with and why?
    2. +4
      22 September 2023 09: 34
      Quote from alexoff
      Everything is still being developed, but they already know

      Certainly. Modern technologies make it possible to know all the performance characteristics of a product before creating a prototype. Welcome to the 21st century.
    3. +1
      23 September 2023 18: 17
      and they already know that production will be cheaper,

      Why not...
      This is mathematics and economics - knowing the order quantity, the cost and price can be easily calculated accordingly
      It also says that NATO supplied more than 2 million shells - which means that approximately the same number needs to be compensated...
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. +2
    22 September 2023 08: 11
    A classic article by this author. “There are a lot of letters,” but the whole point is in two lines: a simplified projectile using simplified technology is proposed to reduce its cost. True, the talk about making the electronic fuse cheaper is somehow unclear, in the future tense. What, they canceled the military acceptance process?
    1. +3
      22 September 2023 09: 21
      Quote: Aviator_
      A classic article by this author. “There are a lot of letters,” but the whole point is in two lines: a simplified projectile using simplified technology is proposed to reduce its cost. True, the talk about making the electronic fuse cheaper is somehow unclear, in the future tense. What, they canceled the military acceptance process?

      They simply decided to follow the path of Musk, who avoids all space suppliers as much as possible for his space products, trying to use conventional commercial technologies. It's the same for military personnel. No steel and chips for over 9000% of the commercial price, and ordinary industrial alloys and chips.
      1. +3
        22 September 2023 09: 57
        Quote: BlackMokona
        It's the same for military personnel

        )))
        For quite some time now, it has not been the military branch that has been developing civilian sectors, but on the contrary, the progress of the military branch is largely determined by how it absorbs the achievements of civilian sectors.

        The state of civilian industries in the Russian Federation and in the countries of the damned NATO bloc (and in general the expanded West) does not require special comment, so if the bourgeoisie is really tasked with providing more ammunition at a cheaper price by the end of the second year of the Northern Military District, then this is bad news for the fight against Nazism.
      2. 0
        1 October 2023 14: 11
        Typical "war production". This has been the case in all countries and times, even since WWI. The metal from steel is changed to cast iron (steel). This way, enterprises that have only one cupola will be able to connect. No need for steel production, no need for forging presses. This results in a more fragile product and you cannot fire with a “full” charge, otherwise the barrel and the end of the gun may break. It is clearly written down in the shooting tables; there is also a separate section for such “grenades”. By the way, casting produces a more accurate shape and reduces turning time. But the distribution of the metal mass in the body is a little worse and the dispersion is a little greater. The sleeve is made of steel instead of brass. TNT is replaced or mixed with cheap ammonal. A simpler fuse is used. Even do not paint shells, because they go straight from the factory to the front, and not for storage. It is curious that an unpainted projectile flies 1% less due to air resistance, and therefore the gun commander for such batches of ammunition makes a special correction for range wink
    2. +1
      22 September 2023 10: 18
      Quote: Aviator_
      A classic article by this author. “Many letters”, but the whole essence is in two lines

      In the author’s defense, he is the only person at VO who regularly issues reviews (obviously compilations of translations of highly specialized articles) of promising Western developments that are almost at the design stage. This is fundamentally important information for true connoisseurs. Naturally, such sources contain very little real content, and the author needs to somehow recoup his work of filtering water in the ocean, because being (editorial payment policy) determines consciousness (volume of the article). So I personally understand this specificity, because information verbosity is much better than an information vacuum.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    3. -6
      22 September 2023 11: 21
      The British, what can we take from them? Just look at their suffering with the l-80. Until the Germans finished it off with a file, there was no point. You can also look at the modernization of Challenger from Rhine Metal. The same collection of jokes.
  4. -4
    22 September 2023 09: 01
    There are quite two things about the electronic fuse: on the one hand, of course, it is useful to be able to control the detonation, but on the other hand, this makes possible electronic counteraction - a forced detonation along the trajectory (there are similar anti-mine systems, the idea is being developed). But it wouldn’t hurt for ours to think about simplification/reducing the cost given the current volume of consumption.
    1. +1
      22 September 2023 19: 23
      Quote: CouchExpert
      but on the other hand, this makes possible electronic counteraction - forced detonation along the trajectory

      How so?
      e-Fuse:

      Each 3P fuse/fuze is automatically and individually programmed by the Proximity Fuse system, which continuously receives data from the fire control computer system. Immediately before firing (!) the safety will be programmed to the selected mode.
      There are currently 6 options.
      All this is done BEFORE the shot is fired.
      Further, after leaving the trunk, it is impossible to influence it.
    2. 0
      1 October 2023 14: 21
      Couchexpert Both radio and conventional remote fuse, analogous to a tube, can be used electronically. The latter does not emit or receive radio waves and cannot be influenced. This is a simple trajectory detonation timer, counting the time from the moment of the shot.
  5. +2
    22 September 2023 09: 21
    The respected author is worried about how Britain will handle ammunition before production begins, other NATO countries are dramatically increasing or increasing their production of ammunition. Imagine that NATO is a conglomerate of countries, and they received 500 million euros from the European Union for these purposes. I'm afraid that if they want, they will produce it; I would rather worry about our production.
  6. -1
    22 September 2023 15: 00
    Class ! The shells will be produced from ordinary grades of steel, using standard equipment, the shells should be cheap, and the requirement for a destruction range is 65 km
    I have not seen cheap English weapons, nor American ones.
    In the photo for the material, the projectile, by the way,with bottom fuse