I’m curious have there been any notable advancements/improvements in conventional artillery capabilities since the Gulf War was fought over a quarter century ago? Has this technology hit something of a plateau?
All the time.
From rail guns, to advanced guidance packages, to improvements in extrended range projectiles, to fancy fire programs that allow placing multiple shells ‘time on target’ from single tube, artillery is constantly being refined and advanced.
You have guided artillery projectiles such as the Excalibur projectile developed 1992. [Inertial and GPS guided]
This differs from the Copperhead projectile used during Desert Storm. [has a laser seeker and needs the target illuminated] M712 Copperhead - Wikipedia
Modular propellent charge systems. US version: XM231/XM232 Modular Artillery Charge System (MACS)
There are similar systems for France (Nextar?) and CZ https://explosia.cz/en/products-2/modular-charges/
Replacements for traditional HE fillers like TNT and Comp B.
One example IMX-101: IMX-101 - Wikipedia
US loads similar IHX-104 and other versions.
These are insensitive high explosive fillers for projectiles and aircraft/missile warheads. If exposed to a fire, the explosive will only melt out and burn rather than detonate. This is a big deal on an aircraft carrier or adjacent aircraft on a flight line. Much improved safety. Allows closer storage due to smaller blast risk. These items are Hazard Class / Division 1.6 for storage and transportation purposes.
I’d be willing to bet that the real advancements are totally unsexy things like communication improvements and further digital integration and the like.
Well, maybe YOU find them unsexy. [fans self]
MRSI (Multiple Round Simultaneous Impact) has progressed from being a parlor trick a well trained artillery crew could do with two rounds on a firing range to computers and autoloaders able to fire 5 or 6 rounds that will all impact the target simultaneously by adjusting the trajectory and propellant charge on each shot.
True. Improved communications may result in higher body counts, but doesn’t have the same pizazz as when the guys in white lab coats announce ‘behold, we have devised the HEAT round’
The single-tube multiple rounds time-on-target is pretty sexy. One tube, whole 'lotta ‘BANG’ on the other end.
That’s what she said.
Nobody believes me when I tell them this, but my father fought on the Western front in WW1. When I was a kid, he told me war stories. One of the things he told me about was the French 75mm field gun. It was the first modern artillery piece featuring a recoil mechanism we would recognize today. It was far superior to anything at the time. Other pieces had to be re-positioned after each round, but the 75 could really pump them out as you can see in [this short video](file:///C:/Users/Galen/Desktop/Desktop%20May%2014%202017/US75FiringWWI.ogv.240p.webm).
Wouldn’t it make more sense, if say… firing at soft targets like infantry in the open, to fire in a grid pattern of some kind, rather than multiple rounds on target? Or do they do that, and I’m not aware of it?
There is going to be some spread in the shells. For infantry/bad guys in the open, they’d use mechanical/electronic time or proximity fuzes to get an airburst [maximum fragmentation]. The idea with multiple rounds on target at the same time is to reducing the scattering of the target audience at show time. For a LARGE group, they’d use a grid pattern.
I don’t believe you.
NM
Okay this sounds sexy, but it necessarily delays the massing of fires onto that target.
The rounds won’t all impact at the exact same spot; there’s going to be a CEP of maybe 5m at best (but don’t hold me to that figure) which means 50% of the rounds will land within a 5m circle of the dead center of the target and 50% will fall outside that 5m circle. MRSI is basically just a TOT (Time On Target) but performed with only a single gun rather than an entire battery or multiple batteries and is done for the same reason; the vast majority of casualties from an artillery barrage on exactly that type of target, infantry in the open, occur within the first moments of the shelling before anyone has taken whatever cover is available, even if that’s only hitting the ground and praying.
How so? Calculating a TOT by an entire battery would take longer than a single gun MRSI for the same effect assuming a six gun battery and the target being located properly for a 6 round MRSI.
The main problem with the French 75 was that it was essentially a direct-fire weapon, and relatively short-ranged. There were indirect-fire guns that could out-range it and could search occluded ground, and that pushed the 75s off the front lines. Where the 75 really shone was in mobile war, and in hasty defense.
Pretty much, this. Even artillery hsa a CEP, and that can be anticipated, or enhanced, as needed.
Not even close to hitting a plateau.
There are hypersonic guns and magnetic rail runs. The speed and velocity of the shell used in these weapons have tremendous destructive power upon contact…no gun power or bomb is needed.
The USA military now has lasers, which of course are invisible ( most lasers are ) and move at the speed of light the can instantly set a small craft in the water into flames.
I have seen the video test of both weapons on the navy. It’s on youtube, which really means its jr level stuff.
There are also some sonic weapons that can produce a noise that can kill in a large radius, though such weapons of fear should not be used unless the importance is high.
The sound at high levels ( 200DB ) can kill. Perhaps more significantly, though, it’s important to note that a sonic weapon doesn’t have to be lethal or incredibly loud to be effective. High-intensity ultrasonic sound (generally anything above 20KHz) can cause physical damage. Some very low frequencies (infrasound) can apparently cause your eyeballs to vibrate, making it very hard to see. Targeted “sonic bullets” that cause localized pain (or simply burst your eardrums) is probably enough to immobilize most non-action-hero humans.
So in the future, a noise making pod might drop out of the sky immobilizing an area or killing those in the radius. After running for 24 hours or so, ground troops could easily clean up the rest.