Army speeds buying of new artillery shells

[unhappycamper]

Army speeds buying of new artillery shells
Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Thursday, August 28, 2008

The Army has accelerated purchasing a high-tech artillery shell that can be fired from 14 miles away yet explode within 30 feet of its target to avoid civilian casualties, USA Today reported Monday.

An urgent request from commanders in Iraq for more accurate artillery to reduce civilian deaths prompted the Army to speed production of the Excalibur shells, according to the Government Accountability Office. In May, the Army awarded an $85 million contract to buy Excaliburs — the most ever spent for the shells, USA Today wrote.

The need for precise weapons was underscored by Friday’s airstrikes in Afghanistan by the U.S.-led coalition that President Hamid Karzai said killed at least 89 civilians, the paper reported. The coalition has acknowledged civilian casualties and said it would investigate.

One Excalibur shell can destroy targets that would require dozens of conventional rounds. The Excalibur uses Global Positioning System signals to home in on targets, while traditional shells are aimed in a general direction, USA Today noted.

Excalibur shells cost $89,000 per round, compared with $300 for a conventional 155 mm shell, the paper wrote.


Rest of article at: http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=57029

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. Do these have the highly toxic depleted uranium casings?

The kind that poison the land and keep killing people for decades?

[unhappycamper]

3. I don't think so.

But wikipedia has the cost at $39,000 per round (2007 guesstimate) --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM982_Excalibur

And yes, the half-life of depleted uranium is about 4.5 billion years.

[Angleae]

7. No 155mm depleted uranium shells.

DU is only for those that need to penetrate armor, 155mm is generally indirect fire.

[Thor_MN]

2. you can buy more than 2 gross (pun intended) conventional shells for the price of one Excalibur

So $89,000 divided by $300 gives you 296 conventional shells for one Excalibur. Is there anything left in Iraq worth $89,000?

Question is, who makes them and how close are their connections to the * admin?

[Crowman1979]

4. Heck you can spend on 250 conventional rounds.

And still have money left over for evacuation/surrender leaflets. It's just a waste of money to make smart weapons with a warhead that weighs less than 250 lbs. Besides artillery was made for attacking enemy troops in mass, not pinpoint attacks.

[rakeeb]

5. and 500 too 2000lb bombs used to be made to drop en masse

to destroy large sections of city or increase the chance that one or more would actually hit the intended target.
That has since evolved to laser or GPS guided bombs that can land within 10m of the intended target.

[Angleae]

6. Exactly.

One shell to hit and destroy the exact target, as opposed to 296 shells to destroy the target and everything within 500m with all the "collateral damage" that goes along with it.

[Crowman1979]

8. Well that is bad when dumb rounds used against a city.

But good when it is a large enemy air base, defensive perimeter or barracks.

[Angleae]

9. There is a use for each.

But both are necessary.