Military Review

Guided artillery shell "Excalibur" was tested

110

Guided artillery shells (UAS) "Excalibur-1b" (Excalibur Ib) manufactured by Raytheon (Raytheon) passed field tests. This was reported by the press service of the company.


According to "Raytheon", in total during the test firing 84 projectile was fired. Most of the shells had a maximum deviation from the target in 2 m, which is a high figure. During the tests, the positive fighting qualities of the ammunition and its compliance with the requirements of the US Department of Defense were also noted.

Shots with the use of UAS were made from the Swedish self-propelled artillery (SAU) "Archer" (Archer) and two American howitzers - M109A6 "Paladine" (Paladine) and LW-155. In 2014, Excalibur will be tested to demonstrate its suitability for mass production.

According to the results of the shooting, it was found that the projectile surpassed its tactical and technical characteristics (TTH) in a number of indicators. The maximum target range was 50,4 km when firing from an Archer self-propelled gun. When testing the compatibility of the projectile with the American artillery systems, the range of 40,54 km was reached, which also turned out to be more than the stated characteristics of the ammunition.

The UCS Escalibur-1b version is manufactured by Raytheon and is a further development of the Escalibur-1-1 and Excalibur-1-2 ammunition. UAS caliber is 155 mm, it is aimed at the target using a satellite navigation system GPS, which ensures high accuracy of destruction.
In addition to the variant EAS "Escalibur-1", the company "Raytheon" is developing an improved navigation system for all the shells of this class.

Up to the present, 640 EAS "Excalibur" has been shot. The projectile is used to pinpoint targets of special importance. According to recent studies, the use of one ESC "Excalibur" allows you to save from 10 to 50 conventional shells.
Originator:
http://www.armstass.su/
110 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Skiff
    Skiff 29 October 2013 12: 08 New
    15
    Well this is not a record, for example ...
    The Denel V-LAP shell is currently considered the record holder for this parameter. In 2006, during the testing of this shell, a German-made self-propelled artillery PzH 2000 sent him 56 kilometers. The maximum firing range declared by the manufacturer with this shell is even greater - 60 km. For comparison, the firing range of the PzH 2000 self-propelled guns with a conventional projectile of the same mass with the same propellant charge does not exceed 28-30 kilometers.

    According to recent studies, the use of one UAS "Excalibur" saves 10 to 50 conventional shells.

    Well, a moot point, According to the calculations of American economists, even with mass production, the Excalibur shell cannot cost less than 50-55 thousand dollars.
    1. smel
      smel 29 October 2013 12: 21 New
      14
      Such a single projectile saves time. Yes, and about saving the usual types of ammunition - this is an invention of the author. Depending on the type of target being hit (or rather, on importance, armor, cover, size, etc.), one shot can replace up to 2,5 thousand of ammunition. But even in the absence of reliable intelligence, this money can fly into the pipe. At one time, we simply rotted a sufficiently large number of such ammunition at firing positions due to the lack of information for completing tasks. And at the same time, they spent insanely big money to accomplish tasks with other types of ammunition. Unfortunately, to no avail.
      1. mirag2
        mirag2 29 October 2013 13: 28 New
        12
        You see: "Due to lack of intelligence"!
        And they say here that drones are rubbish and are not needed!
        Isn't that a mistaken judgment?
        By themselves, drones can be rubbish-free, but in conjunction with modern means of warfare, a huge benefit in everything.
        Well, you see, the shells would not rot, and they would save their 2.5 thousand.
        What money would remain intact (and these are new tanks and aircraft, etc.).
        Is not it?
      2. T80UM1
        T80UM1 30 October 2013 07: 31 New
        +1
        And if for example not real-time guided projectiles but real-time intelligence, for example a map of the area transmitted by the satellite in video streaming mode, the front is divided into several sections for each section of its own battery, then moving targets can also be fired. The coordinates are calculated according to the speed of movement and according to the terrain, again thanks to real time.
    2. Basarev
      Basarev 29 October 2013 12: 43 New
      -8
      But in general, this is all pampering. Here Peony with its atomic shells - this is the thing.
      1. kafa
        kafa 29 October 2013 12: 50 New
        12
        it's like shitting in the trunk of a VAZ 2106 and expecting that the glove compartment will not smell fool
      2. ed1968
        ed1968 29 October 2013 13: 45 New
        10
        Have you thought about the earth and the environment with your atomic shells? On this planet, our grandchildren and children still live
    3. Nayhas
      Nayhas 29 October 2013 12: 56 New
      +2
      Quote: Skiff
      Well, a moot point, According to the calculations of American economists, even with mass production, the Excalibur shell cannot cost less than 50-55 thousand dollars.

      Saving is not in the sense of paying back the cost of 50 shells, but the fact that 50 conventional shells will take to defeat the target ...
    4. mirag2
      mirag2 29 October 2013 13: 24 New
      +7
      Competent post-respect.
      Of course, a high-precision projectile is probably more expensive than a dozen conventional ones — well, the thing is different — it will allow you to complete a combat mission from the first (second) shot.
      This is important ...
      1. smel
        smel 29 October 2013 15: 53 New
        +4
        It will be boring - I will place "Krasnopol" in work, filmed video through a conventional rangefinder. This is the work of 268 glanders at the Totsky training ground
    5. skif33
      skif33 29 October 2013 14: 22 New
      +5
      The Denel V-LAP shell is currently considered the record holder for this parameter. In 2006, during the testing of this shell, a German-made self-propelled artillery PzH 2000 sent him 56 kilometers. The maximum firing range declared by the manufacturer with this shell is even greater - 60 km.


      V-LAP technology is used for active rockets, which Excalibur is not. You gave a not very, to put it mildly, correct example !!! This is akin to comparing the firing range with a grenade launcher and just a grenade launcher.
      1. PLO
        PLO 29 October 2013 14: 41 New
        +2
        V-LAP technology is used for active rockets, which Excalibur is not.

        actually the M982 Excalibur is an active missile
        1. Aryan
          Aryan 29 October 2013 14: 58 New
          +1
          As always, an asymmetric answer is needed:
          "high priority targets" to be mobile
          cast a mobile concrete hopper wassat
        2. skif33
          skif33 29 October 2013 16: 04 New
          0
          actually the M982 Excalibur is an active rocket.

          in comparison with the V-DenelLAP projectile, it is conditional, since the range is provided not only due to the solid-fuel engine but also due to the plumage, and you must agree, the name sounds like this "Excalibur guided artillery projectile." And the Excalibur's firing accuracy is 2 meters. and up to 300x hundred meters of V-DenelLAP on trials in South Africa.
          1. PLO
            PLO 29 October 2013 16: 38 New
            +3
            Do not confuse warm with soft

            the projectile is active-reactive if it has a gas generator, and it has both excalibur and b-paws.

            another thing is that in-paws are uncontrollable, unlike excalibur
    6. varov14
      varov14 29 October 2013 16: 01 New
      +1
      The military is seeing the root of the problem, as it is written, it is in that direction that we must work.
    7. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 29 October 2013 17: 23 New
      +1
      I would like more about our new weapons ...
      1. alone
        alone 29 October 2013 19: 42 New
        +3
        According to Raytheon, 84 shells were fired during the test firing. Most of the shells had a maximum deviation of 2 m from the target, which is a high indicator


        this is undoubtedly a high indicator. The 155 mmth projectile, which explodes 2 meters from the target, is guaranteed to destroy it. 1 target = 1 shell.
        1. SkiF_RnD
          SkiF_RnD 29 October 2013 20: 04 New
          +5
          It remains to take into account the accuracy of target designation. This is an important nuance. smile
  2. kafa
    kafa 29 October 2013 12: 18 New
    16
    all this becomes irrelevant if our valiant defenders find means to suppress the GPS satellite navigation system wink
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 29 October 2013 13: 06 New
      +6
      Quote: kafa
      all this becomes irrelevant if our valiant defenders find means to suppress the GPS satellite navigation system

      I have a feeling that there are such developments. smile
      1. mirag2
        mirag2 29 October 2013 14: 44 New
        +5
        Dear comrade, a very correct feeling!
        Such developments cannot but be conducted.
        If GPS is the very foundation of all of NATO’s modern weapons.
        1. GSH-18
          GSH-18 29 October 2013 20: 02 New
          0
          Quote: mirag2
          Dear comrade, a very correct feeling!
          Such developments cannot but be conducted.
          If GPS is the very foundation of all of NATO’s modern weapons.

          What developments? Everything has been done for a long time. These gps-controlled devices are relevant in the absence of war between the Russian Federation and the states. For example, for an effective-indicative-terrifying strike in some kind of "banana" republic. hi
      2. Joker
        Joker 29 October 2013 19: 05 New
        +1
        I have a feeling that there are such developments

        That is why the Americans are developing tools that will not be guided by the ZhPS.
    2. Skiff_spb
      Skiff_spb 29 October 2013 13: 14 New
      0
      So I thought that in a global or pain-less serious mess, he is not a player. But for small "anti-terrorist" - it is the most.

      On the other hand - I strongly suspect that the option with ANN also has a place to be, then ... But there is also a problem - you need to know your coordinates and the coordinates of the target exactly, and in a situation when there are no exact navigation systems ... Is it just pointing at the beacon / marker but when accounting for electronic warfare ...

      In general, kmk is purely local garbage for small-town conflicts.
      1. clidon
        clidon 29 October 2013 18: 39 New
        0
        All over the world there are systems for suppressing radio communications and radars, but for some reason no one believes that radio communications or radars will be used only in small "anti-terrorist" warfare ...
    3. Aryan
      Aryan 29 October 2013 14: 52 New
      +1
      they have a spread of only 2 meters
      and for some reason we have a navigator
      then the cars go into the swamp
      then whatever
      instead of driving through the streets
      can different zhps? what
      1. Skiff_spb
        Skiff_spb 29 October 2013 17: 48 New
        +4
        Different receivers. You are not ready to pay 30-100 thousand for a GPS navigator, if you can buy consumer goods for 3-5, which in general will work the same in 95% of cases?
    4. Kyrgyz
      Kyrgyz 29 October 2013 19: 14 New
      -1
      Quote: kafa
      all this becomes irrelevant if our valiant defenders find means to suppress the GPS satellite navigation system

      What to look for request atmospheric nuclear explosion
  3. 528Obrp
    528Obrp 29 October 2013 12: 35 New
    +1
    Caliber UAS is 155 m
    This is Veshch! recourse
    The lesion area will be 18859 square meters. And this is without explosives!
    1. Basarev
      Basarev 29 October 2013 12: 44 New
      -1
      These pathetic 18859 square meters look somehow ridiculous when compared with the Smerch MLRS strike zone
      1. GSH-18
        GSH-18 29 October 2013 20: 12 New
        +2
        Quote: Basarev
        These pathetic 18859 square meters look somehow ridiculous when compared with the Smerch MLRS strike zone

        And in comparison with the "Peony" (nuclear projectile), the MLRS Smerch will not work even for a child's firecracker! The logical series can be continued to the "Tsar Bomb".
        Here, the point is not in power, but in ACCURACY. This is a high-precision artillery ammunition.
    2. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 12: 45 New
      +8
      yes you don’t be sad muffling the bourgeois GPS and our glonass didn’t work well and who will win the fight between a nerd and a tractor driver in an open field without an iPhone laughing
      1. Hon
        Hon 29 October 2013 15: 13 New
        +4
        Quote: kafa
        yes you don’t be sad muffling the bourgeois GPS and our glonass didn’t work well and who will win the fight between a nerd and a tractor driver in a clean field without an iPhone laughing

        And in the Amer army nerds? Just because they are technically crammed does not make them bad fighters.
        1. Black Colonel
          Black Colonel 29 October 2013 16: 32 New
          +5
          "Are there nerds in the American army? The fact that they are technically stuffed doesn't make them bad fighters."
          But the muffled GPS will dishearten them!
          1. Hon
            Hon 29 October 2013 17: 31 New
            +1
            Quote: Black Colonel
            But the muffled GPS will dishearten them!

            And how did they fight before the advent of GPS? And by the way, why didn’t those jammed GPSs when rodents aimed their artillery with their help?
        2. Guilty
          Guilty 30 October 2013 08: 28 New
          0
          Che I have not heard recently the victorious reports of the Amer army. And not because they did not fight)))))
          All high-precision crap to the first serious mess. Then everything breaks down, burns out, battery low and what is the result?
          Sapper shovel !!!!! That's what survivors on the ruins of civilization will finish each other with. And democracy)))
  4. Alexxeg73
    Alexxeg73 29 October 2013 12: 44 New
    +2
    One nuclear explosion in the stratosphere - and they can shoot these shells from slingshots.
    1. roial
      roial 29 October 2013 15: 10 New
      +3
      One nuclear explosion in the stratosphere - and they can shoot these shells from slingshots.


      Are you so sure ??? For several years now, satellites with protection against electromagnetic radiation have been launched into orbit. So that
      nuclear explosion

      not a panacea. I'm not saying that you yourself will deprive your own companions.
      1. vvvvv
        vvvvv 29 October 2013 19: 52 New
        -1
        Then the S-500.
        1. roial
          roial 29 October 2013 20: 22 New
          0
          what s-500? satellite can bring down? fool
  5. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 29 October 2013 12: 51 New
    +5
    In Afghanistan, the Dutch tried to shoot at the maximum range from PZH 2000 with version 1a, the results were sad. The first quo turned out to be not ice, and secondly, compared to conventional shells, these powers are one and a half times lower, so they knocked on calculators and wept. As a result, quickly removed these sau from there.
    1. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 13: 14 New
      +4
      and there esche GPS does not work laughing but they did not know
      .....
  6. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 13: 12 New
    0
    Quote: kafa
    all this becomes irrelevant if our valiant defenders find means to suppress the GPS satellite navigation system wink

    This remedy has long been called REB wink (according to the type of tasks being solved, the REP means have a rather large nomenclature)
    1. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 13: 24 New
      +6
      I'm wildly sorry, but in the Soviet Union it was called EW
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 29 October 2013 13: 31 New
        0
        Does this really change something?
        1. kafa
          kafa 29 October 2013 13: 36 New
          +2
          yes there is nothing like rep rap rap hi
          1. Lesnik
            Lesnik 29 October 2013 13: 40 New
            0
            draw an asterisk and calm down
            1. kafa
              kafa 29 October 2013 13: 56 New
              +2
              in vain are you so hi if smart and write cho modesty with a microscope to hammer nails
  7. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 13: 18 New
    0
    Quote: 1c-inform-city
    In Afghanistan, the Dutch tried to shoot at the maximum range from PZH 2000 with version 1a, the results were sad. The first quo turned out to be not ice, and secondly, compared to conventional shells, these powers are one and a half times lower, so they knocked on calculators and wept. As a result, quickly removed these sau from there.

    and what shell?
    1. 1c-inform-city
      1c-inform-city 29 October 2013 13: 25 New
      +1
      Before the upcoming version of Escalibur
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 29 October 2013 13: 38 New
        +1
        I agree this is like hammering nails with a microscope. It would be interesting to read the restrictions on the use, storage and transportation. It will be logical to assume that the programming of this b / p is also not shell-based.
  8. Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 29 October 2013 13: 19 New
    +6
    Regarding countermeasures to all these satellite-based systems. Back in the days of Reagan's bluff called SDI, one of our academics said something like this: "We will pour two NAILS tanks into near-earth orbit, and then no one will be able to use space."
    1. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 13: 28 New
      +1
      IT IS PURE EXTREME MEASURES. Teach the history of military conflicts of the last centuries. Do not fail to look into the Arab-Israeli wink
    2. IRBIS
      IRBIS 29 October 2013 14: 12 New
      +2
      Quote: Sergei Medvedev
      one of our academics said approximately the following: "we will pour two tanks of NAILS into the near-earth orbit, and then no one will be able to use space."

      This "academician" is clearly h (m) udak - does the Earth have only one near-earth orbit?
      And such ammunition has a duplicated guidance system.
    3. kostyan77708
      kostyan77708 29 October 2013 15: 10 New
      0
      I think this academician Sakharov
      1. IRBIS
        IRBIS 29 October 2013 15: 24 New
        0
        Quote: kostyan77708
        I think this academician Sakharov

        No, even more "academician" ...
  9. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 14: 07 New
    +1
    Quote: kafa
    in vain are you so hi if smart and write cho modesty with a microscope to hammer nails

    Okay ....... just calm down
  10. kafa
    kafa 29 October 2013 14: 11 New
    +4
    The most characteristic from the point of view of the use of EW forces and means in the interests of air defense were the Arab-Israeli wars of the 1960s and 1970s. They used for the first time Soviet units and subunits of electronic warfare, which were in Egypt until August 1972.

    In the "Six Day War" of 1967, the Arab states did not conduct electronic warfare due to the lack of radio intelligence and radio interference equipment in their armed forces. However, at the end of 1967, at the request of the governments of Egypt and Syria, the USSR supplied these countries with radio interference equipment and provided expert assistance in the formation and training of electronic warfare units. In April 1970, an electronic warfare department was formed in the air defense of Egypt (adviser Lieutenant Colonel Musatov), ​​to which the tactical radio communication jamming battalion, the electronic warfare center and the VHF radio communication jamming company were subordinate. Lieutenant Colonel Ismakov was the advisor in the electronic warfare center.

    Radio interference in military operations was first created in April 1970 when Egyptian aircraft attacked enemy targets in the occupied Sinai Peninsula. As a result, Israeli army correspondents could not establish teletype communications. In subsequent hostilities, interference began to be widely used to suppress VHF radio communications.

    But the actions in Egypt from March 1, 1971 to August 13, 1972 of the 513rd separate EW battalion under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Mavrin should be especially noted. Officers and warrant officers, soldiers and sergeants during the fighting showed courage and courage, showed high technical and special training, a clear coordination in combat work on reconnaissance and interference means in repelling the attacks of Israeli aircraft. By a decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the Order of the Red Star was awarded to Lieutenant Colonel Mavrin, Majors Kasich, Smirnov, Captain Kazantsev, senior lieutenants Mishchenko, Gaidukov, Pechenkin.

    As a result of the use of interference, communications between Israeli aircraft and ground control posts were often disrupted, which negatively affected the results of operations. After the reports of Israeli pilots to ground control posts on the violation of radio communications, they received commands to stop the combat mission and return to the air base. The EW radio technical center was deployed in combat order at positions near the city of Cairo, and the EW mobile groups were formed from the center, which conducted electronic reconnaissance in the Suez Canal zone and interfered with the Israeli airborne radar, which raided air defense and air defense radar positions Of Egypt.

    In the Arab-Israeli war of 1973, units and subunits of the EW of Egypt took part in the hostilities. By this time, thanks to the work of Soviet military advisers and specialists, they were ready for the combat use of radio intelligence and interference. During the military operations of 1973, the jamming battalion of the VHF radio communication aircraft was under operational control of the Air Force and was controlled by the CP of aviation. Units and subunits of interference with an aircraft radar were under operational command of the air defense command and, in cooperation with air defense units, provided cover for objects and groupings of troops in the areas of the cities of Cairo, Alexandria, Safaga and crossings through the Suez Canal. In addition, EW units and subunits conducted radio-technical reconnaissance of land and aircraft RES, which were then attacked by Egyptian aircraft and artillery. The information from the electronic reconnaissance means of the electronic warfare parts after its analysis made it possible to determine the class of onboard radio electronic equipment and the type of their carriers. These data were used at the Egyptian Air Defense Center in assessing the current air and radio-electronic situation.

    In conclusion, one cannot fail to mention the experience of military operations in Afghanistan. Here, the main efforts of the electronic warfare were aimed at radio-electronic suppression of radio communications between the gangs of Dushmans and artillery, VHF radio lines for detonating guided mines, and blocking the guidance of missiles at the target.

    Vladimir Nikolaevich Gordienko - candidate of military sciences, associate professor, colonel.
  11. starhina01
    starhina01 29 October 2013 14: 33 New
    +1
    it is aimed at the target using the satellite navigation system GPS, am accustomed to everything ready lol we will set you up and change the coordinates bully let's see how you fight soldier
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 29 October 2013 15: 18 New
      +2
      Quote: starhina01
      and change the coordinates

      That's right, "Excalibur" shoots only at stationary targets.
  12. kafa
    kafa 29 October 2013 14: 34 New
    0
    forgive me those present smile
    In the USSR, the issues of jamming radio communications and radio-telecontrol systems were actively dealt with in the mid-30s of the last century. The first prototypes of HF and VHF jamming stations were developed ("Shtorm", "Shtorm-2", "Thunder"). In 1937 the Russian scientist M.A. Bonch-Bruevich put forward the idea of ​​jamming radars and proposed a number of ways to protect them from radio interference. In 1939, engineer NIKabanov developed a method and equipment for jamming a "false object" radar. In 1939, during the battles for Khalkhin Gol, the Red Army misled the command of the Japanese Armed Forces by carrying out radio camouflage and radio disinformation measures and achieved success.

    So the birth of electronic warfare was completed and the first ways of its development were found.
  13. kim. 230752
    kim. 230752 29 October 2013 14: 35 New
    +5
    How deep we are ... Neither shells, nor GLONAS ...
  14. kafa
    kafa 29 October 2013 14: 46 New
    -1
    Quote: kim.230752
    How deep we are ... Neither shells, nor GLONAS ...

    mattresses were very surprised that their super weapons did not work in Afghanistan laughing
  15. kafa
    kafa 29 October 2013 15: 33 New
    0
    Quote: IRBIS
    Quote: kostyan77708
    I think this academician Sakharov

    No, even more "academician" ...

    not not sugars and not those whom they listed and not nails but balls and neither who then nor we nor enemies nor friends whose we couldn’t go into space - it was a stop cock of SOI (star wars) and until it was ripped off .... ...
  16. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 15: 56 New
    +2
    Quote: Aryan
    As always, an asymmetric answer is needed:
    "high priority targets" to be mobile
    cast a mobile concrete hopper wassat

    This shell will only scratch him smile
  17. Migari
    Migari 29 October 2013 16: 15 New
    +6
    And what we have here are the first samples of guided artillery shells.
    1. Lesnik
      Lesnik 29 October 2013 16: 47 New
      +3
      Unfortunately, Krasnopoli has many restrictions on the conditions of use. crying
      1. mail
        mail 4 November 2013 19: 30 New
        0
        Despite this, the French purchased a batch of these shells.
    2. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 16: 50 New
      -4
      Gospadya and Krasnopol and whalers and other utter hemorrhoids; there are few of them, very expensive for training, and then only either window dressing or "shoot the corpses" ............
      and in the battle when the gods of war wonder how they will write off high-precision ammunition and which eccentric Russia will use a laser pointer to show a funnel near which they will find fragments of his DNA ............... continue ...
    3. Victor
      Victor 29 October 2013 21: 05 New
      +5
      Quote: Migari
      here are the first examples of guided artillery shells.

      I ask everyone to pay attention to the Soviet uniform of the soldiers (for reference: camouflage began to be worn only after 1988) and the Soviet markings of equipment. Those. the first guided projectiles were tested and were put into service back in the eighties of the last century under the USSR. I here recently tried to prove to a colleague that in the late eighties we had already been shooting with "Whale Catchers", but he did not believe me. Here's the evidence.
    4. ty60
      ty60 29 October 2013 21: 39 New
      0
      I served urgent on 2C3 Acacia. Nostalgia, damn it!
    5. Guilty
      Guilty 30 October 2013 09: 21 New
      0
      A little annoying laser rangefinder. The laser in snowfall and rain is distorted, respectively, the accuracy drops. How to be in this case? Do not fight in bad weather, not an answer lol
  18. mixxlll
    mixxlll 29 October 2013 16: 42 New
    +1
    From what distance fired?
    1. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 16: 57 New
      -1
      THE Fighter WILL KILL YOU offensive shard of 10-15 grams ............
  19. kafa
    kafa 29 October 2013 17: 58 New
    -3
    Quote: kafa
    Gospadya and Krasnopol and whalers and other utter hemorrhoids; there are few of them, very expensive for training, and then only either window dressing or "shoot the corpses" ............
    and in the battle when the gods of war wonder how they will write off high-precision ammunition and which eccentric Russia will use a laser pointer to show a funnel near which they will find fragments of his DNA ............... continue ...

    damn copy-paste to engage in for those hto did not cut into either the tanks or other shulupon did not indulge. but rusty weapons steel saw how the soil looked dynamite bones. I saw how people looked who looked behind him. they were living people ......... and I talked with them
  20. voliador
    voliador 29 October 2013 18: 09 New
    +2
    Unfortunately, Krasnopoli has many restrictions on the conditions of use.

    Well, time does not stand still.
    1. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 18: 38 New
      -2
      currently inquiries hi b-lin client no money ammunition expired and not even koditsyya they will not hit even a stump in the endless desert of Belarusian woodland


      all the time and before whom and on
    2. clidon
      clidon 29 October 2013 18: 40 New
      +1
      So far, they have not learned how to navigate in GLONASS. here they only begin to deal with bombs.
  21. APASUS
    APASUS 29 October 2013 18: 28 New
    +5
    Where are our Krasnopoli, Kitolov next generation?
    And then we read about "Excalibur" for the sixth time
    1. kafa
      kafa 29 October 2013 18: 40 New
      -2
      where is my kamment
  22. kafa
    kafa 29 October 2013 18: 46 New
    0
    why a resource in which, as I understand it, ADMIN no ADMIN. I don’t understand how I didn’t understand me.
  23. ParapaPanda
    ParapaPanda 29 October 2013 18: 48 New
    +2
    Do you only know about the pop whales? They already deserve theirs. I remember that we have new shells in the development of Beta, Firn-1.
  24. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 19: 54 New
    0
    Quote: lonely
    According to Raytheon, 84 shells were fired during the test firing. Most of the shells had a maximum deviation of 2 m from the target, which is a high indicator


    this is undoubtedly a high indicator. The 155 mmth projectile, which explodes 2 meters from the target, is guaranteed to destroy it. 1 target = 1 shell.

    With the known coordinates of the target (and the ZhPS coordinates are known), this can be achieved in much less costly ways.
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 October 2013 20: 19 New
      0
      Is it as if not a secret? What could be cheaper than artillery?
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 29 October 2013 20: 23 New
        +1
        Caps can be thrown.
      2. alone
        alone 29 October 2013 20: 24 New
        0
        The Makarov pistol)) wassat
        1. Lesnik
          Lesnik 29 October 2013 20: 35 New
          0
          Quote: lonely
          The Makarov pistol)) wassat

          In capable hands, yes wink
          1. clidon
            clidon 29 October 2013 20: 44 New
            +1
            Shoot something? Having failed the task of destroying the identified target.
  25. vair
    vair 29 October 2013 19: 55 New
    0
    Quote: Black Colonel
    But the muffled GPS will dishearten them!

    I would say - in a stupor.
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 October 2013 20: 20 New
      0
      And jammed radio communications will lead to stupor control of the division, and jammed radars, air defense system. )
  26. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 20: 22 New
    0
    Quote: clidon
    Is it as if not a secret? What could be cheaper than artillery?

    And who said that it was not artillery? Did I write something about death rays from outer space? laughing
    one battery fire raid wink
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 October 2013 20: 45 New
      +3
      Wow. That is, one shell is much more problematic than a fire raid. That all high-precision weapons are turned, and the solution is simple, not a bomb with TV guidance and carpet bombing. Not an ATGM, but a volley of anti-tank guns. At the same time we will plow the earth? wink
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 29 October 2013 21: 03 New
        0
        You less listen to any nonsense. For example, individual tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are generally considered impractical to engage from closed firing positions - the expenditure of shells on the target is painfully large.
        1. starhina01
          starhina01 29 October 2013 22: 01 New
          0
          For example, individual tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are generally considered impractical to engage from closed firing positions - but where will it go when these goals are clouded at point blank range? hi (eh, you had to cover half an hour ago) the sau commander said soldier
          not having time to reboot soldier
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 29 October 2013 22: 35 New
            0
            If these goals clatter you, then, therefore, you see them. So, you can use a lot of them. Including guided and adjustable artillery shells.
            And this is not "economy" There are many more important goals on the battlefield.
            1. Guilty
              Guilty 30 October 2013 09: 28 New
              0
              What kind of vision must one have in order to see beyond 25 km? Choi then Lopatov does not converge)))
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 30 October 2013 09: 33 New
                0
                What kind of weapons do you need to have on tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, so that at a distance of 25 km "at close range"? You misunderstood something.
                1. Guilty
                  Guilty 30 October 2013 16: 23 New
                  0
                  Sorry, read more closely.
              2. Victor
                Victor 30 October 2013 16: 40 New
                0
                Quote: Guilty
                What kind of vision must one have in order to see beyond 25 km? Choi then Lopatov does not converge)))

                Illumination of the target is made from command and observation posts, remote or side observation posts by reconnaissance rangefinders. KNPs are in direct combat formations of motorized rifle or parachute airborne units at the front line, in the zone of direct contact with the enemy. Artillery firing positions are located in the depths of our troops, at ranges providing for enemy fire damage both on the front line of defense and in the depth of defense, as a rule to the depth of the second echelon of defense of the NATO motorized infantry battalions. Those. simply put, a range of 25 km is the total range of the projectile, and targets for destruction are in close proximity to the KNP or the observation post. Therefore, everything coincides with Lopatov, and you need to tighten up the basic knowledge on the use of artillery.
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 29 October 2013 20: 49 New
      0
      Quote: Forestman
      one battery fire raid wink

      Yeah. 225 shells if the target is not armored, or 675 if armored. What nonsense.
  27. armandos
    armandos 29 October 2013 20: 28 New
    +4
    Escalibur-type shells will work perfectly in mountainous areas. In this regard, the Americans are reasoning correctly. And what the hell is the money when it saves the life of a soldier? And Archer and Palladin are great cars, there's nothing to argue about. About nuclear shells which for some reason many hope, and there is nothing to say. Well, you can’t keep your finger on the red button in the modern world. NF is only the last argument. Amers have one problem, they are so ahead of time with their developments that they simply can not imagine a war, without computers and jeepies. This is their weakness !. We urgently need to develop the industry of electronic countermeasures and then Khan. However, there are problems ... The worst thing is that all the brains that can counteract this threat are flowing into America. We need to learn how to protect our geniuses!
  28. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 20: 51 New
    0
    Quote: clidon
    Wow. That is, one shell is much more problematic than a fire raid. That all high-precision weapons are turned, and the solution is simple, not a bomb with TV guidance and carpet bombing. Not an ATGM, but a volley of anti-tank guns. At the same time we will plow the earth? wink

    Have you read the article? It shows the cost of one shot. Comparable costs? and why not a vigorous loaf of what to trifle?
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 October 2013 21: 00 New
      0
      Do you measure the whole war in dollars? And if, after your unsuccessful artillery attack, the target will hide, regroup and respond with such a projectile, decreasing the "artillery raiders" by one, and then by one more.
      To fire this projectile, you can use a smaller outfit of forces. Logistic load is reduced. Losses among civilians are decreasing (which is important now). Etc.
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 29 October 2013 21: 06 New
        0
        Quote: clidon
        Do you measure the whole war in dollars? And if, after your unsuccessful artillery attack, the target will hide, regroup and respond with such a projectile, decreasing the "artillery raiders" by one, and then by one more.


        and some other hypothetical examples?

        Quote: clidon
        To fire this projectile, you can use a smaller outfit of forces.

        which ones? carry one gun all over the front?

        Quote: clidon
        Logistic load is reduced.

        please me if you know the conditions of storage, transportation and use of this weapons
        Quote: clidon
        Losses among civilians are decreasing (which is important now). Etc.

        Are you going to use it against a solitary terrorist in a crowd?
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 29 October 2013 21: 12 New
        +2
        Even if measured in dollars, 675 conventional shells, plus resource consumption ... it will result in a lot more money than one managed.
  29. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 21: 12 New
    0
    Quote: mixxlll
    From what distance fired?

    it is indicated in the credits
  30. aepocmam
    aepocmam 29 October 2013 21: 18 New
    0
    "... the use of one UAS" Excalibur "saves from 10 to 50 conventional shells."

    Then the question is: how much does one UAS "Excalibur" cost and how much does 50 conventional shells cost?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 29 October 2013 21: 40 New
      0
      German contract from 2009: one shell of 2700 dollars. Accordingly, 50 conventional shells 135 bucks.
  31. Lesnik
    Lesnik 29 October 2013 21: 22 New
    +1
    Quote: aepocmam
    "... the use of one UAS" Excalibur "saves from 10 to 50 conventional shells."

    Then the question is: how much does one UAS "Excalibur" cost and how much does 50 conventional shells cost?

    how much memory serves me in the army of the USSR (and they are in the warehouses) 25 rubles one shell
    Quote: Skiff

    Excalibur "allows you to save from 10 to 50 conventional shells. [/ I]
    Well, a moot point, According to the calculations of American economists, even with mass production, the Excalibur shell cannot cost less than 50-55 thousand dollars.


    I think the difference is obvious
    1. starhina01
      starhina01 29 October 2013 22: 13 New
      0
      how much memory does not fail me in the army of the USSR (and it is precisely them in the warehouses) 25 rubles, in what quantity? if, as usual, with a warehouse more or less then we will drop them anyway, and if not? our people will again have little skill ? hi
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 4 November 2013 18: 50 New
        0
        On three world
  32. negeroi
    negeroi 29 October 2013 21: 38 New
    +2
    So the USA exists for that. For Boeing and Lockheed, NASA, the Navy and the Army. They don’t need to steal. The guys are squeezed out of a heap. Scientifically, high-tech, expensive. Everything is good.
  33. Tyumen
    Tyumen 30 October 2013 00: 22 New
    0
    Excalibur is the name of the sword of King Arthur. What roots make themselves felt?
  34. Current 72
    Current 72 30 October 2013 00: 39 New
    0
    And I think so. All over the world they have come up with so much nasty things about this piece of human flesh (sorry for a rough comparison) that it seems to me that we should stop this for a long time. And then we will live to the point that we will destroy ourselves as a human race. understand that at the moment, it is NOT POSSIBLE.
  35. AlexxxNik
    AlexxxNik 30 October 2013 02: 23 New
    +1
    As far as I understand the question, this Excalibur is controlled along the entire flight path, they have a bunch of all kinds of mechanisms inside, which is not the most for power. I think if our "centimeter" instead of a laser receiver is equipped with a glonass receiver and a gas generator added, it will be a song, despite the fact that its control system is much cheaper and lighter. Or maybe there is already something like that, for nothing that the Ministry of Defense classified the technology of impulse correction of projectiles
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 30 October 2013 09: 17 New
      0
      The main thing is that modernization does not lead to its appreciation. Otherwise, he will lose his advantages.
      You just need to expand its capabilities. For example, in the Italian-German guided missiles of the Vulcan family, in addition to the inertial guidance module with correction according to the ZHPS, at the firing position, you can additionally install either a semi-active laser seeker (they do not refuse illumination, quite the opposite, they returned to it) or passive infrared.
  36. tegezen
    tegezen 1 November 2013 23: 54 New
    +1
    I think that competent jamming in the GPS range will reduce their accuracy to naught.