The Pentagon expects that the US defense budget for 2025 will include modernization of artillery

The US Army is rushing to determine what combination of artillery capabilities it needs in its future arsenal. Industry is expected to have an idea of ​​the final concept by the time the Biden administration submits its 2025 budget request, Pentagon acquisition chief Doug Bush told Breaking Defense.

The official noted that the aforementioned budget request is traditionally presented to Congress in early February. Consequently, there is not much time left to conduct additional research as part of the program for improving artillery systems and decide on the final version that will be ordered by military-industrial complex enterprises.

The material says that we are talking about the “Extended Range Artillery Program” (ERCA), under which the Pentagon plans to increase the range of 155-mm artillery to 70 km, which is 30 km more than the existing one.

At the moment, American engineers are considering several options for achieving this goal.

The first is to install a gun with a barrel length of 109 calibers on the BAE Systems Paladin M7A58 hB self-propelled gun. However, the development of the platform encountered technical problems, such as excessive barrel wear.

However, there is a second, as Bush put it, cheaper option - modernizing the ammunition. BAE and Boeing are currently developing an improved 155-mm projectile, designated XM1155.

According to a BAE press release, the prototype XM-1155-SC sub-caliber projectile was GPS-guided and effectively hit “stationary and moving targets in difficult environments at a distance twice the range of existing precision-guided gun-launched munitions.”

In turn, Boeing is working on a prototype missile and plans to integrate Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) technology into it.

According to Bush, at the moment there are enough options to implement the ERCA program. However, taking into account the experience of the Ukrainian conflict and taking into account the likely confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region, engineers must make a number of additional amendments and conduct thorough research.

Comments

[credo]

We wish the Anglo-Saxons failure in the field of modernization of artillery and shells for it, as well as the colossal costs of this work.

[ism_ek]

There are no miracles. We increase range, reduce power.
Very little in Ukraine began to talk about Excalibur. Either it’s over, or the power really isn’t enough.

[Alex777]

Quote: ism_ek

Either it’s over, or the power really isn’t enough.

They say that although he is expensive, he has started to mow down.

[KVU-NSVD]

In addition to accuracy and range, price is important in a projectile. I hope the story with the main artillery caliber of Zamvolt repeats itself. And with an increase in length and energy, the service life of the barrel invariably decreases, new technologies are needed, and this again increases the price tag. In the conditions of American military pricing, this increase is especially noticeable.

[Alex777]

Quote: KVU-NSVD

I hope the story with the main artillery caliber of Zamvolt repeats itself.

The States will provide serial production.
The coalition left them no other options.
So there is no direct analogy with Zamvolt.
The quantity in the series will matter.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: KVU-NSVD

In addition to accuracy and range, price is important in a projectile. I hope the story with the main artillery caliber of Zamvolt repeats itself. And with an increase in length and energy, the service life of the barrel invariably decreases, new technologies are needed, and this again increases the price tag. In the conditions of American military pricing, this increase is especially noticeable.

The price of a projectile is not important at all if you look at it systematically
If the probability of hitting a target for a smart projectile is 0.95, and for a regular one 0.05, then even if a thousand ordinary projectiles are fired, the target will not be hit.
And these thousand shells need to be produced, a huge amount of resources, both human, machine tools, and material, must be spent.
Then these thousand shells need to be somehow transported, stored, protected, which also requires resources a thousand times greater than those of one smart shell.
Then somehow transport these thousand shells to the front line, with safety and security, which is also a thousand times more expensive than doing the same thing but with one shell.
Then, firing a thousand shells, destroy hundreds of artillery barrels, which cost tens of millions of rubles per piece.
And when you have a thousand targets for which you need to spend either a thousand expensive, but smart, shells, or a million ordinary shells, then you understand that using expensive shells is an order of magnitude cheaper than ordinary shells.

This is exactly what happens to those who think with their heads, and not just eat with them.

[Repellent]

Quote: SovAr238A

This is exactly what happens to those who think with their heads, and not just eat with them.

Yeah. Exactly

Quote: SovAr238A

If the probability of hitting a target is 0.95 for a smart projectile, and 0.05 for a regular projectile, then even if a thousand ordinary shells are fired, the target will not be hit

My friend, don't embarrass yourself. There is such a Bernoulli formula, below in the picture - calculating the probability that out of 1000 shots, with a hit probability of every 0.05, not a single one will hit the target:

It is easy to see that the probability of such an event (5.3*10^-23) is practically zero

[ximkim]

What can be modernized there?
Tell the experts.

[orionvitt]

using GPS, and effectively hit “stationary and moving targets in difficult conditions at a distance twice the range of existing precision guided gun-launched munitions.

Everything together and everything at once, and it doesn’t even come cheaper. In this situation, you need to sacrifice something. Either range, or accuracy, or reliability (wear), or price, or something else. And just like in a fairy tale, everything is possible at once, of course, but in this case, both shells and guns. will turn out to be literally gold, which, given the already prohibitive prices of Western weapons, is not very conducive to mass mass production. And someone explain to me how you can use GPS to hit moving goals, and even in difficult conditions? After all, as far as we know, GPS is a system for precise positioning, not targeting, also for moving targets. How does it work for them? Or just blurt out something “clever”.

[Chernyaev Roman]

The target designation is given by a UAV or an AWACS aircraft, the data is received by the self-propelled guns, and a shot is fired according to the coordinates. Perhaps, already with a calculated lead (target speed, wind, charge temperature, etc.) or in flight, control of the projectile is transferred to the UAV, whose operator corrects the flight of the projectile. In general, it is cheaper to make several thousand FPV drones than a couple hundred such artillery systems.

[Constantine N]

a drone can be shot down, we have problems with this due to a lack of technology in microelectronics. But NATO is unlikely