Comments on: Guided Smart Shells

By: Isegoria

Isegoria — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 13:41:30 +0000

I wouldn't say that inefficiency was a strong point of traditional artillery; it was simply unavoidable. Targeting information wasn't accurate, and delivery wasn't precise, so one shot, one kill was never on the table. As with small arms, near misses have a suppressive effect, but not all unaimed fire is equally suppressive; near misses are still much better than wild misses, and timing matters, too.

By: Isegoria

Isegoria — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 13:30:04 +0000

While rockets are increasingly easy to shoot down, I do think we need to recognize that a relatively slow, ballistic Qassam rocket and Mach-3, guided missile aren't equally easy to shoot down. I do wonder if we're going to see Robotech-style missiles, with erratic arcs, as point defenses improve.

By: L. C. Rees

L. C. Rees — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 04:08:05 +0000

“Inefficiency” was a strong point of traditional artillery bombardment. Bombardment is sometimes as much about mentally disrupting its human targets by getting them to put their heads down as it is about physically destroying them. Bonus points if you achieve both, which Excalibur by itself is unlikely to do.

By: Philip Ngai

Philip Ngai — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 03:24:33 +0000

Boeing has a project to put a Small Diameter Bomb (version II with wings and moving target capability) on an MLRS rocket.

By: AAB

AAB — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 18:29:11 +0000

Scipio Americanus says, "Rockets are increasingly easy to shoot down." If that's the case then all those shiny new missile frigates built by the navies of China, Pakistan, Russia, and others will need to be re-fitted with different weapon systems. Perhaps new navies will comprise old-fashioned battleships alongside aircraft carriers full of low-cost drones; maybe even airbourne aircraft carriers.

By: Isegoria

Isegoria — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 18:10:58 +0000

We're probably ignoring the modern Bloch without even realizing it.

By: Scipio Americanus

Scipio Americanus — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 16:32:58 +0000

Rockets are increasingly easy to shoot down, as the Israelis are proving. Admittedly, artillery shells aren’t too far behind in that department.

Military technology is going some very interesting places in the near future. The current technological landscape is giving me a rather 1910ish feel. Lots of new, meaningful toys, but no one’s figured out how they all fit together.

By: Isegoria

Isegoria — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 14:05:32 +0000

A precision-guided shell that hits within four meters at far greater range could easily be worth a hundred conventional shells. We know most shells hit nothing of value, and we know friendly artillery often isn’t. When we add in the extra range and ability to plunge down past cover, yeah, an Excalibur shell could easily be worth it.

By: Alex J.

Alex J. — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:28:43 +0000

To my mind it seems that guided rockets would be more straightforward. There’s GMLRS already, but they’re pretty big. I’m thinking guided katyusha.

By: Cassander

Cassander — Sun, 15 Mar 2015 20:00:58 +0000

Smart bombs are cheaper if you don’t count the cost of the plane that has to fly them out there. And while the Montanas were truly awesome battlewagons, they would have been obnoxiously slow for modern fleets built around 32kt carriers.