Not meaning to offend or be contentious but I imagine the same sort of "losing the art" issue was raised when they did away with having to muzzle load each cannon ball.

As a former grunt that also had the opportunity to work in the HQ element of a heavy gun arty btn, I appreciate the hell out of the idea of a shell that will still hit the target, even if shot up to 15 degrees off deflection.

I saw too many miscalcs and accidental transpositions of coords after 4 or 5 days of the fire control folk being with little or no sleep on exercises and was once close enough to the receiving end of such a mishap to give half a crap about folk moaning over loss of artfulness.

Originally Posted by Grimmy

Not meaning to offend or be contentious but I imagine the same sort of "losing the art" issue was raised when they did away with having to muzzle load each cannon ball.

As a former grunt that also had the opportunity to work in the HQ element of a heavy gun arty btn, I appreciate the hell out of the idea of a shell that will still hit the target, even if shot up to 15 degrees off deflection.

I saw too many miscalcs and accidental transpositions of coords after 4 or 5 days of the fire control folk being with little or no sleep on exercises and was once close enough to the receiving end of such a mishap to give half a crap about folk moaning over loss of artfulness.

One does not eliminate the other.
You can be expert at "the art" and still have excalibur available for hitting those "ard to get to" places.
My greatest fear is that "the art" will take a backseat to technology.
"You should be able to do your job with what´s available."
If you got a superduper round at hand, fine.
If not, get the job done with what you have.

KJ:

I think you'll find that in most militaries, the US not excepted, that tends to be the rule.

Folk love to grief the US military over its supposed over reliance on high tech gimcrackery but when it comes down to the nitty gritty, we still manage to fix the bayonet to the end of the rifle and get it done when required.

That was in no way a dig at the US military, it was a fat boot to any and all soldiers not willing to learn their craft..No matter nation.

^ Yeah, I didnt mean to imply that you were digging at us either. Many do though. Anyone who's worn the uniform of the US military has had to deal with all sorts of accusations and insinuations.
It's all part of the package deal.

Originally Posted by Grimmy

KJ:

I think you'll find that in most militaries, the US not excepted, that tends to be the rule.

Folk love to grief the US military over its supposed over reliance on high tech gimcrackery but when it comes down to the nitty gritty, we still manage to fix the bayonet to the end of the rifle and get it done when required.

.

Originally Posted by KJ

One does not eliminate the other.
You can be expert at "the art" and still have excalibur available for hitting those "ard to get to" places.
My greatest fear is that "the art" will take a backseat to technology.
"You should be able to do your job with what´s available."
If you got a superduper round at hand, fine.
If not, get the job done with what you have.

Hence my want of the 8 Inch Gun Crews having the Smart Round, leaving the 155 Crews with current issue Rounds.... and as a bonus having what we used to call "More Bang for the Buck".

With a mix of Smart Rounds and Dumb Rounds over time there will come less smart Crews, because of an over reliance on the Smart Rounds, because the Smart Round would involve less work.

The US Military phased out its 8 Inch Guns in the 90's, so it makes sense, in my opinion, to bring the 8 Inch back on line, with the new Round, and train the 8 Inch Gun Crews how to use it.
If one wished to work with such a Round, and is currently on a 155 or even a 105 Crew, well one could put in a transfer request to an 8 Inch Battery.
Anyone on a 155 Crew would have to learn it old school.

thanks alot for the information on the EXCALIBUR. we are still currently using the in service 155 ammo. they are talking about introducing the new DENELL round that fires 70km. The government is also looking at buying the PZH 2000 for the new gun up grade and replacing the 105mm with the new light 155mm that can be towed with the mog.

When I was stationed in a USAFAD in Germany in the early 80's, our gun bunnies had no guns. So we'd take them up to Augsburg to train for SQT on the M110 8' arty they had there. All the bunnies loved the gun, said it was the most accurate in the world. Unfortunately, a kid with a BB gun could clear the crew off the weapon. Since they replaced it with the MRLS and now have the Advanced ATACMS (I forget the correct nomenclature), that gun is never coming back. Besides, some of the guns Buell designed for the S. Africans took over as the most innately accurate gun since then.

Originally Posted by bulldogg

Missileer??

Sorry, BD, all I know about the Excalibur is the weekly program updates we get in email. Remember, there still has to be battlefield information for any weapon to be accurate. Someone is integrating fire control updates, in the microseconds, with the round to ensure the quoted accuracy. Tucson brags loudest but it took several other behind the scenes programs to make this happen. They get all the accolades since they build the actual kill vehicles.

There's another aspect to this. If the round works as advertised, then it makes arty usable in urban warfare, even in lower intensity fights like currently ongoing.

If arty can be precise enough to use in pin point demolition of hardened targets in a city environment, that's a huge bennie to the grunts since arty can be put on target day or night with much more ease than keeping support air constantly overhead.