# Why does the military use guided missiles so often? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 4, 2009, 9:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884 "2009-07-04T09:29:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![thirdname](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d07c76/32.png) [@thirdname](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thirdname)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 9:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/1 "2009-07-04T09:29:41Z")
I’ve seen a lot of videos from Iraq of Afghanistan where American forces use guided missiles when I would think a gun or rocket would work. For example: [ItemFix - Social Video Factory](http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=353_1183998074) Here they use a Javelin to detonate a car bomb. The range is fairly short, with a flight time of 2 seconds. (Does anyone know how fast that things flies?) Couldn’t they have used an AT4 antitank rocket for that? The Javelin costs $80,000 apiece, while the AT4 costs $1,400. Do our troops not carry the AT4? It is less accurate than the Javelin, and it has a shorter range. Nonetheless, isn’t it at least accurate enough to use against some fixed targets? I see tons of Javelin videos and few AT4 shots. Here’s another clip of a Javelin and a fixed target: [ItemFix - Social Video Factory](http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6b9_1187741930) Flight time seems like 3 or 4 seconds to me, perhaps that might be a little out of AT4 range. Would that .50 cal go through the vehicle (assuming it’s a car or truck) if they shot it long enough? Here, an Apache uses 2 Hellfire missiles to take out a mortar team: [ItemFix - Social Video Factory](http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=735_1246541630) They use one Hellfire to kill the 2 insurgents, and then another simply to destroy the mortar tube which is lying on the ground! A hellfire costs $68,000. Couldn’t they have used the gun? I’ve seen other videos where they use the gun in urban settings. It’s less accurate, but on the other hand the Hellfire has a bigger blast. If they had to use the first Hellfire, couldn’t they at least close in and use the gun on the mortar tube after the guys were dead? Maybe send someone in to pick it up? Do they consider the cost of these things when they’re setting policies on when to use them? ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 9:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/2 "2009-07-04T09:57:41Z")
Well, it’s not like they go out and buy a new one every time they fire one off. That $80,000 was already spent. That missile can sit on a shelf until it goes bad (nothing lasts forever and even missiles have a shelf life) or you can fire it at an insurgent. We buy tons of missiles, and we either use them or we don’t. If you don’t use them up before they were due to be replaced anyway, then that $80,000 was completely wasted. Another issue is collateral damage. Kill two insurgents and no one cares. Accidentally drop an unguided missile into a nearby house and the US is on the front pages of CNN in a very bad way. A third issue is in a war, you want to use overkill. You don’t want to “just barely” take out the enemy, you want to make sure they are good and dead so they can’t shoot back. This reduces your own casualties. Trying to cut costs is an excellent way to get your own people killed, and sending our own folks home in body bags is something we really try to avoid these days. ---
**Author:** ![thirdname](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d07c76/32.png) [@thirdname](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thirdname)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/3 "2009-07-04T14:16:15Z")
Further reading reveals that they’re developing a new missile for just this sort of situation, at least in the helicopter context: > **[Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Precision_Kill_Weapon_System)** > > The AGR-20 Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) is a design conversion of Hydra 70 unguided rockets with a laser guidance kit to turn them into precision-guided munitions (PGMs). APKWS is approximately one-third the cost and one-third the weight of the current inventory of laser-guided weapons, has a lower yield more suitable for avoiding collateral damage, and takes one quarter of the time for ordnance personnel to load and unload. > Where possible the system utilizes existing Hydra 70 c... It’s a lightweight guided missile based on the Hydra 70 rocket, and it’s supposed to cost $10,000 apiece. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/4 "2009-07-04T14:25:16Z")
No idea, but it seems like since you’ve got limited carrying space for equipment, you’re generally going to choose whatever has the most versatility to carry along. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/5 "2009-07-04T14:31:01Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > Another issue is collateral damage. Kill two insurgents and no one cares. Accidentally drop an unguided missile into a nearby house and the US is on the front pages of CNN in a very bad way. I think it is this. If you send in a “dumb bomb” and it goes off course hitting the Ronald McDonald House of Kandahar, then you have a PR disaster on your hands. “You mean we killed 400 kids just to save a few bucks on the bomb we used? Impeach Obama!!” ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/6 "2009-07-04T15:03:30Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > No idea, but it seems like since you’ve got limited carrying space for equipment, you’re generally going to choose whatever has the most versatility to carry along. At least in the case of the Apache, it always carries its 30mm gun. I’m a little confused by that video because it seemed like a much more appropriate weapon to engage with in that instance - the helicopter didn’t require standoff distance against a couple of kids, it didn’t need use a pop-up attack manuever, and using 30mm rounds would decrease the likeliness of collateral damage while not losing significant precision. This situation seems like a perfect example of when the gun would be used - I don’t know why they didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/7 "2009-07-04T20:36:20Z")
Whn you fire the gun, you have downrange ricochets for about 3 miles in about a +/- 45 degree cone from the direction of fire. If there’s anything other than bare desert out there, ROE might well demand a missile to reduce the risk of collateral damage. ---
**Author:** ![yoyodyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/a9a28c/32.png) [@yoyodyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yoyodyne)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/8 "2009-07-04T21:08:30Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > This situation seems like a perfect example of when the gun would be used - I don’t know why they didn’t. Out of ammo? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/9 "2009-07-04T21:53:22Z")
There’s plenty of videos out there of Apaches firing their guns. In many of them, the gun, while accurate, has a good amount of area coverage. Once fired, there seems to be an awful lot of squirters – guys running for cover. In the case the OP linked to, if the first burst missed and one of those guys ran into a house on the one side of the street, that would be it for the engagement. The chances of getting away from a Hellfire are pretty damn low. Here’s some gun footage, which generally show (a) the first shot generally doesn’t hit, and (b) in some cases a heck of a lot of ammo is expended. [http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8e0\_1194637801](http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8e0_1194637801) > **[ItemFix - Social Video Factory](https://www.itemfix.com/?r=ll)** > > Social Video Factory > **[Apache Copters Engage Insurgent Snipers - 30mm - video Dailymotion](https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4kb9j)** > > (Gun-Cam shows US Apache helicopters engage with 30 mm guns as they're taking mortar fire from the enemy ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/10 "2009-07-04T21:53:44Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > This situation seems like a perfect example of when the gun would be used - I don’t know why they didn’t. ::reaches into his bag of tricks and shakes his crystal ball:: A gun will not always produce the effect you want on a car bomb. The round may pass right through the sheet metal of the car, or may hit something inside the car and frag apart without actually hitting a critical component. Even then, the fifty-cal may only cause _deflagration_ and not detonation (which I wouldn’t want of an unknown explosive if I were on scene). Plus, the blast of the missile’s warhead would help break things apart in the VBIED before they had a chance to function. Plus, you need standoff. In a VBIED, that’s a hell of a lot more explosives you have to assume for than a standard bomb or piece of military ordnance. If your missile can give you no-kidding, pinpoint accuracy from a distance much easier than having to try to snipe at the VBIED, then spend the money and be safer. Using that Javelin makes sense to me, without having all of the details of the mission. Tripler Yes, I’m armchair quarterbacking. But I know things. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/11 "2009-07-04T23:43:25Z")
VBIED = vehicle-based improvised explosive device? Wouldn’t it be easier to say “car bomb”? ---
**Author:** ![Billdo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billdo/32/315_2.png) [@Billdo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billdo)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2009, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/12 "2009-07-04T23:52:43Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > VBIED = vehicle-based improvised explosive device? Wouldn’t it be easier to say “car bomb”? I believe in the military they have a minimum quantity of acronyms that they have to use at all times. I suspect that he was cutting some severe corners just using the one in that post. ---
**Author:** ![matt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a6a055/32.png) [@matt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/13 "2009-07-05T00:26:19Z")
> [@Tripler](#): > > A gun will not always produce the effect you want on a car bomb. The round may pass right through the sheet metal of the car, or may hit something inside the car and frag apart without actually hitting a critical component. Even then, the fifty-cal may only cause _deflagration_ and not detonation (which I wouldn’t want of an unknown explosive if I were on scene). While I agree with the general point about a .50 cal not being the best tool for disrupting an explosive device, if the vehicle ends up burning out without a detonation, that _will_ consume the explosive without generating frag or blast. Of course, it also means you have to sit around waiting for the fire to burn out before you’re (fairly) sure it’s safe… ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/14 "2009-07-05T01:49:01Z")
> [@](#): > > Here, an Apache uses 2 Hellfire missiles to take out a mortar team: [http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=735\_1246541630](http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=735_1246541630) They use one Hellfire to kill the 2 insurgents, and then another simply to destroy the mortar tube which is lying on the ground! A hellfire costs $68,000. Couldn’t they have used the gun? I’ve seen other videos where they use the gun in urban settings. It’s less accurate, but on the other hand the Hellfire has a bigger blast. If they had to use the first Hellfire, couldn’t they at least close in and use the gun on the mortar tube after the guys were dead? Maybe send someone in to pick it up? Obviously something changed, I can remember back during Desert Sheild that Gen Powell was a bit irked that army apaches were plinking infantry with the hellfires, when they should have been using the FFAR’s or the gun. Is there paperwork that gets filled out in a post mission debrief that explains why weapons used get questioned. I’m thinking mainly of the Vietnam conflict, when airforce F4 phantoms that lacked the gun would fire sparrows and sidewinders at NVA or cong forces that were after shot down aircrews, and in one case dropping weapons pylons. Declan ---
**Author:** ![The\_Controvert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dec6dc/32.png) [@The\_Controvert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Controvert)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/15 "2009-07-05T03:01:22Z")
removed ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/16 "2009-07-05T03:20:54Z")
> [@Declan](#): > > Obviously something changed, I can remember back during Desert Sheild that Gen Powell was a bit irked that army apaches were plinking infantry with the hellfires, when they should have been using the FFAR’s or the gun. Desert Storm. I’m intrigued by Ravenman’s first link, which appears to show an Apache shooting an obviously unarmed man. Why did that guy need to be killed? ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/17 "2009-07-05T03:35:21Z")
From what I understand, the smart weapons were a lot more rare back then compared to now, still a relatively new thing. So it might have just come off as an unacceptable amount of overkill, sort of the Army playing with its toys. Nowadays, I don’t even know if they would make a habit of bringing the budget stuff. Figure it costs just as much to ship the expensive stuff as the cheap stuff, so why not bring the stuff that will work better? ---
**Author:** ![Tripler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripler/32/21807_2.png) [@Tripler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tripler)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/18 "2009-07-05T04:20:36Z")
> [@matt](#): > > . . .if the vehicle ends up burning out without a detonation, that _will_ consume the explosive without generating frag or blast. Of course, it also means you have to sit around waiting for the fire to burn out before you’re (fairly) sure it’s safe… That’s a big _if_, which I ought to have spelt out before: With an initial reconnaissance, you can’t guarantee what explosive it is, and can’t tell for sure if it will burn or detonate on impact. You just don’t know, so you have to assume the worst. Further, if you _are_ waiting around for something to burn, there’s always a chance it’ll go high order anyway (maybe you clipped a relatively insensitive main charge, which burns into the booster, reversing the explosive train anyway and goes “big boom”.) Why VBIED? Because it distinguishes between a VB or simply a placed IED. It’s a method of classification, which would instinctively trigger size and distance things in my head. Besides, “car bomb” is soooooo 1984. Tripler Of course, now I have to go look up some blast distance tables just to fall asleep. ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/19 "2009-07-05T05:26:33Z")
First off, it’s vehicle-_borne_ IED. Second, the acronym just builds on the already well-known IED. You know how when you see “KIA”, you don’t really have to translate it? Well it’s the same thing for VBIED and IED. So it’s actually shorter than “car bomb” and much more descriptive. There’s a whole slew of adjective-IED words like SVBIED (suicide vbied), SVIED (suicide vest), HBIED (house-borne, which is a ridiculous word choice). Some the sillier ones are the DBIED- the donkey borne IED - and the HBIED - Human borne IED. And a big reason here is simple agent-principle dilemma. The shooter isn’t the purchaser, so he’d much rather see a big explosion than save the gov’t a few bucks. Hell, they’re the ones that shipped him to war, after all. It’s the least they could do. So there’s certainly an factor of simply “playing with your toys”. My unit fired the first JDAMS in the Iraq theater. Well wouldn’t you know it, the same guys that called for the first one called for another one the next day. And the next, and the next… I have my doubts that there were actually that many Military Aged Males dressed in black going into the same train station day after day after day. More like “I’m really bored. Hey, Johnson, see that wild dog out there? Looks like an insurgent retrieving weapons from a cache, doesn’t it?” “Yep. Sure does. Better drop a JDAM on it. Call for fire!” ---
**Author:** ![Gethsemane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ce73a5/32.png) [@Gethsemane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gethsemane)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2009, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884/20 "2009-07-05T18:41:40Z")
My only contribution here is to mention the BBIED. Bicycle Bourne IED. Sounds like a joke until you think of how much you could stuff into a bike frame. …no wait, it’s still pretty funny. And yes, people do get promoted based off developing acronyms. That’s the only reason I can think of for them being so pervasive. Not to hijack, but is anyone not sure what to call the enemy in Afghanistan anymore? We went from TB- Taliban, to INS - Insurgents, to the latest nom du jour, AAF - Anti-Afghan Forces. Nothing worse then getting a report of an AAF FAM FOF from a COI during a CAS OP. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-the-military-use-guided-missiles-so-often/501884.md?page=2)