Was unaware of such prices, have you got some link? In that case the scenario changes of course
Austin wrote:The Russian army will receive from the satellite-guided bombs
Moscow Design Bureau "Compass" - one of the major Russian developers of navigation for the Armed Forces - successfully tested GLONASS navigation module for artillery ammunition.
The new module, created under the "Dynamics", can be installed on new shells, and the existing ones, said, "Izvestia," a source in the Defense Ministry.
- Module Development "Compass" can be screwed into the head of the artillery shells of 152 mm and above, at the regular place of fuse. It includes a combination fuze, GLONASS receiver and control surfaces - aerodynamic control surfaces, which are arranged in the flight path of the projectile and correct, - said the source "Izvestia".
In contrast, shells, controlled by a laser beam, the projectile with the module "Dynamics" does not depend on weather conditions and does not require external illumination purposes, so you can quickly hit point targets with known coordinates. Circular error probable modernized so the shell does not exceed 10 m, whereas for conventional 152-mm shells at long range shooting, it may be 100 m or more.
Russian version of the modernization of ammunition allows the shells with a satellite-guided considerably more expensive than 155-mm projectile American Excalibur from guided by GPS. This missile, equipped with a gas generator and built-in rudder, it is worth more than $ 80 thousand is expected that a large batch of its price should fall to $ 50 thousand Domestic module which allows to upgrade existing missiles in storage, will cost a little more than $ 1 thousand, explained " Izvestia, "a source in the military-industrial complex.
- The module can be used for both the old shells, as well as new, but in any case it will be much cheaper than American products. Russian scientists have been able to achieve sustainable GLONASS signal reception on the rotating shell, whereas the American "Excalibur" to stop its rotation to get a navigation signal. This greatly complicates and increases the cost of its construction, - the interlocutor of the newspaper.
According to the chief editor of trade magazine "Arsenal" Victor Murakhovski, the new Russian design - a real revolution in artillery.
- With the new shell can be reused to reduce the consumption of ammunition. When firing conventional ammunition to the platoon strong point to 1.8 thousand rounds, and then require ten times less. Shooting accuracy modernized missiles do not fall from a distance - it will be the same regardless of whether we shoot a 5 km or 50 km. This allows you to instantly strike any target, the main thing - to know their coordinates, which can be obtained from the reconnaissance drones and other sources - said the expert.
Murakhovski also noted that the low price of the module allows you to quickly equip the artillery units more guided missiles, with no additional upgrade themselves do not need guns.
However, the director of the Center for Military Forecasting Anatoly Tsyganok said that for effective use of such shells in the military system lacks precision targeting.
- Deep exploration to solve other problems, and no guidance on its long-range artillery will not be distracted. Satellite controls all field and there will not be reconfigured for each instrument, - said the Gypsy.
In his opinion, direct high-precision bombs to unmanned spy planes, which in the Russian army yet.
Back to top
Note this is from 2011, and the targeting issues for the Russian Army have clearly been addressed too.https://www.russiadefence.net/t1606p25-russian-gun-artillery-discussion-thread
OK, would be great to have examples
Examples of Soviet/Russian guided gun launched munitions?
AFAIK they have guided rounds for all their gun and mortar calibres 100mm and bigger that are in first line service... that includes missiles for the different 100mm guns... (ie BMP-3 100mm rifled gun, 100mm rifled gun of the T-54/55 tank, and smoothbore 100mm gun of the MT-12, they have a guided 120mm mortar round, and a 122mm guided round, as well as the 125mm rounds of various types including Svir and Sokol-1, and of course their naval 100mm guns and 130mm guns, while their 152mm guns have guided shells of course... both old and new, and they had guided shells for their 160mm mortar and 180mm guns too, though they are likely disused along with the weapons. And of course they have 203mm and 240mm guided rounds as well.)
Yes this logic is clear, and it is clear also that Russia will use an increasing amount of guided munitions. But in practical terms reaching certain level of precision is very difficult and very expensive. A big blast makes your ordnance less reliant on sensitive guidance and this has been noticed and put in practice in Syria
Yeah but big blasts can be counter productive... being able to deal with a point target using a direct fire 82mm gun/mortar that directly hits the target with a 4kg projectile is often going to be quicker and easier and cheaper than lobbing a 110kg 203mm shell from enormous range from an enormous gun that might land within 10m of the target...
Having to take out the whole city block because accuracy is expensive is fine for WWIII, but in local wars where you spent all this money on target acquisition and identification capabilities, you might as well just destroy the target and leave everything else more or less intact if you can.
OK. Any existing proposal of a ship of this kind? Battleship comes to mind, and they were all decommissioned.
They were decomissioned because they were old battleships not actually designed for the role at hand.
Calibre of modern naval cannons is substantially smaller now and it does not seem there is a big push to change this.
But accuracy and range make modern guns even more valuable in many ways.
The rail gun on the Zumwalts was to be the substitute but I don't see it is going anywhere soon.
Work on EMALS could lead to a bomb thrower that might be useful with smaller bomb weights... especially with a nose mounted fuse with a GLONASS guidance package that allows it some ability to steer.
So NGS is supposed to be pursued still but I don't see real determined efforts, with the focus being rather on missiles and air power.
Perhaps it is waiting for the right technology to be developed... missiles are effective, but not so cost effective... putting the aiming and propulsion into the gun launch platform makes the projectiles much simpler and cheaper...
Agreed, but they could house rail guns with long range. Since we are talking about future systems...
A specially designed rail gun maybe could make the projectile overloads small enough to launch missiles without booster and heavily increased warhead sizes to very long ranges and at reduced costs.
Or maximise the overloads to get best performance and simplify the projectile so it can take enormous acceleration forces on launch... some sort of nose or tail mounted scramjet motor to negate drag and extend range...
The land based opponent would have a huge advantage in numbers, being able to base their artillery on land. Would the Serna or similar landing craft withstand this use?
If they pick a landing area that is well defended it would need extensive artillery preparation before any attack... as the ground forces are landed and move forward the Coalitions could provide fire support to those ground units... the ground units requesting fire support could lase the targets they want hit directly, so it is the equivalent of giving front line ground troops 40kg HE rounds they can direct simply by pointing a laser at the target and making a radio call.
The ideal fire support.
And the ability for ground forces on land to hit a moving landing craft... well good luck with that...
Obviously firing from a moving landing craft would reduce accuracy, but laser guided shells would correct that...
Krasnopol was trialed by French like decade and half ago togerher with designs from Sweden, US, South Africa, South Korea... it was never obtained in quantities nor introduced in service.
The frogs backed out of another deal with the Russians... what a shock... no surprises there I guess.
They did select it as their winner however.
And the actual original system entered Soviet service in the Mid 1980s... and it has been used in Syria to great effect too.
Light construction of fast landing craft cannot withstand huge forces of 152mm gun fired! Maybe if specially strengthened and still in the water, not mowing, but than that won`t be Serna LC anymore.
Water is an excellent medium to absorb recoil force, and the gun mechanism itself is designed to absorb some of the force too.
They could easily design a shock absorbing platform for the vehicle to sit on in the Serna when it fires...