Duffers Drift Redux: Nightmare on Wazir Street

[Juan Rico]

thank you, fellas... i confused the word artillery from excalibur's actual potential (these videos are better than any spring break group amateur porn )

[yt]V-lj5QvZYBo[/yt]
[yt]Bvf5aAabkhM[/yt]

[Stan]

Hey Juan Rico !
Great videos, thanks !

Holy Moses, $39K for a 155 round with a typical 3-setting fuse, and up to 13 feet from target

Have we removed map reading and 8-digit coords from Arty training ? Once upon a time, 8 digits were within 10 meters. Jeez, what happened to map reading in BCT

[jkm_101_fso]

Holy Moses, $39K for a 155 round with a typical 3-setting fuse, and up to 13 feet from target :eek

Consider that the Excalibur is another attempt by the Artillery to stay relevant

Have we removed map reading and 8-digit coords from Arty training ? Once upon a time, 8 digits were within 10 meters. Jeez, what happened to map reading in BCT

No, map reading has not been removed from FA school...13F and 2LTs still learn how to CFF using a map, mil compass and terrain sketch. The issue with Excalibur is that when CFF using grid, don't give the grid to the front of the building...you must figure out the 10 digit to the center of the building. Precision is the goal...minimizing collateral damage.

[Stan]

Consider that the Excalibur is another attempt by the Artillery to stay relevant.

No, map reading has not been removed from FA school...13F and 2LTs still learn how to CFF using a map, mil compass and terrain sketch. The issue with Excalibur is that when CFF using grid, don't give the grid to the front of the building...you must figure out the 10 digit to the center of the building. Precision is the goal...minimizing collateral damage.

JKM, Don't want to date myself herein (although I much younger than Ken), but in Korea (late 70s) 2 clicks from the DMZ, were 2 crusty old E-7s with 4P1 that could send an 8 inch (charge 5) to an otherwise (ahem) uninhabited island and slap a nat's butt off a daisy . On the other hand, when the ROK Koreans neglected to cut off bags 6 and 7, a few "practice" rounds kinda sorta overshot (by 5 miles) the uninhabited island

Raining Arty and setting fuses is an art that only a sniper could even remotely relate to. The Excalibur is more than 20 times the cost of a HC round and has merely replaced what those kids should be learning with a pencil and pad.

[Ken White]

Raining Arty and setting fuses is an art that only a sniper could even remotely relate to. The Excalibur is more than 20 times the cost of a HC round and has merely replaced what those kids should be learning with a pencil and pad.

Too true. We refuse to spend money on decent training but will spend megabucks on high tech items that compensate for training shortfalls (to an extent).

Not that training flows cash benefits to only a very few Congressional districts whereas high tech stuff with lots of sub-contractors send bucks to many...

[Cavguy]

Too true. We refuse to spend money on decent training but will spend megabucks on high tech items that compensate for training shortfalls (to an extent).

Not that training flows cash benefits to only a very few Congressional districts whereas high tech stuff with lots of sub-contractors send bucks to many...

Have to disagree with both of you, sometimes the curmudgeon/ "back in my day" aspect shows a little much. While there are many issues with the artillery skillsets (stemming from its employment as infantry the past years), don't blame the round, it is not a fix for poor artillery skills. And our guys are still precise with standard HE fires - within 50m of target (usually less). That is great for conventional employment, but hits an entirely different building in urban terrain.

Excalibur is more precise than even the best planned fire missions because it adjusts itself in the terminal flight - regardless of a sudden wind gust or bad barometric data or even (depends) wrong charge.

I know we have a taste for technical solutions to training problems (another discussion). But don't use that to slam a round that performs a critical service. With Excalibur we can virtually ensure first round effects that minimize collateral damage within a few feet of a 10 digit grid every time with extremely rare exception. I can't say the same for standard HE.

[Stan]

Have to disagree with both of you, sometimes the curmudgeon/ "back in my day" aspect shows a little much. While there are many issues with the artillery skillsets (stemming from its employment as infantry the past years), don't blame the round, it is not a fix for poor artillery skills. And our guys are still precise with standard HE fires - within 50m of target (usually less). That is great for conventional employment, but hits an entirely different building in urban terrain.

I knew this would come back to bite me (errr Ken).
Hey, Cavguy, it's not my fault they built those houses soooo close together

Excalibur is more precise than even the best planned fire missions because it adjusts itself in the terminal flight - regardless of a sudden wind gust or bad barometric data or even (depends) wrong charge.

I know we have a taste for technical solutions to training problems (another discussion). But don't use that to slam a round that performs a critical service. With Excalibur we can virtually ensure first round effects that minimize collateral damage within a few feet of a 10 digit grid every time with extremely rare exception. I can't say the same for standard HE.

Seems to me that collateral damage now runs our political will back home, and funds our acquisitions (munitions) while abroad (39K a round is a tad high).

[Ken White]

Have to disagree with both of you.

Lots of people do. My Wife thinks I go out of my way to encourage it...

...sometimes the curmudgeon/ "back in my day" aspect shows a little much.

Sometimes the "that was then this is now" and the "we're a lot smarter than that nowadays" syndromes do as well. Warfare doesn't change that much, nor do people. Cities are cities. Yeah, we do have wall to wall media coverage and relations and a changed view of whats acceptable in war and killing innocent civilians -- but I'm aware of that.

...While there are many issues with the artillery skillsets (stemming from its employment as infantry the past years), don't blame the round, it is not a fix for poor artillery skills. And our guys are still precise with standard HE fires - within 50m of target (usually less). That is great for conventional employment, but hits an entirely different building in urban terrain.

You misconstrue -- I'm not knocking the round, it has its uses and I don't question that.

However, I know (not from experience, from observation today, 26 Aug 08 - and this is a human being / human nature, not a military, comment) that the best solution that is simplest for most people and will provide the most legal and PR cover in event of a flap will always be selected. Even if it is massive overkill (no pun intended).

I also know that best is enemy of good enough...

I know we have a taste for technical solutions to training problems (another discussion). But don't use that to slam a round that performs a critical service. With Excalibur we can virtually ensure first round effects that minimize collateral damage within a few feet of a 10 digit grid every time with extremely rare exception. I can't say the same for standard HE.

I can't either. I can say that your ten digit grid is a function of a mathematic and electronic marvel that GPS, laser ranging and a goniometer (three possibilities for minor error) and human interface (a fourth) that almost invariably does not translate to a map all that accurately (a fifth) and that such 'precision' is occasionally required but far more frequently is not needed though it may be almost always desired.

I'm not slamming the round, it's a good thing. I AM slamming the potential for excessive use of an expensive round for PR, liability and other less savory reasons when conventional rounds would suffice. More importantly, I'm slamming a desire for tech solutions -- but that, as you say, is another discussion.

Two different things.

[jkm_101_fso]

I'm not slamming the round, it's a good thing. I AM slamming the potential for excessive use of an expensive round for PR, liability and other less savory reasons when conventional rounds would suffice.

As an artillerymen, I can assure you that if I've got the opportunity to mass fires with cheap HE, I will. I would rather call "Left 50, Fire for Effect", with a six-gun battery shooting, than give a 10 digit for a "one and done" Excalibur.

But, sometimes you gotta use the expensive toys; if that means no one innocent gets hurt or killed or their possessions aren't destroyed, then it's probably a good idea to use the EXCAL.

[Ken White]

But, if it means that innocent people won't be killed or maimed, or their homes and possessions won't be destroyed, then I will fire the expensive round...if that was one of the "unsavory reasons" you were referring to.

It was not. That's a savory reason. OTOH, to plop it in just because it is semi-surgical when there is a less firepower intensive (to include no Arty at all...) option borders on the unsavory. To call for one on no more than a suspicion that it might get some unsociable characters is even less savory; to use one to cover other er, uhm, errors is unsavory.

One of the many things that suck about war is that it happens to be expensive. The effects of inflicting collateral damage on the population will be much more expensive in the long run than an artillery round that costs $38K.

Totally agree on both of those statements; the cost of the round is not IMO an issue. In fact, that cost will be a factor in eliminating some of my (very minor) concerns about overuse because the criteria for use will be tightened and, as long as we don't go overboard, that's a good thing.

Your second concern mirrors mine also on the overuse possibility -- and it is no more than a human nature based possibility; it is not a fact. I merely was making a cautionary statement, no more. That and noting that our penchant for tech solutions to training problems (another discussion, as said) is, IMO, problematic; no intent to pick on the round per se; just sniping at sometimes excess capability

Also, I think most Artillerymen would agree with your opening statement on a battery volley. Grunts and Tankers OTOH can influence what's called for, thus the slight possibility of misuse I cited...

ADDED: I also agree with your edit. All the above was based on the original posting.

[RTK]

Sometimes the "that was then this is now" and the "we're a lot smarter than that nowadays" syndromes do as well.

I love this place. Where else could a thread about a tactical decision exercise morph into the "my generation could beat up your generation" thread?

[Ken White]

one should address the comment and not the one who made the comment.

Address not less ye be addressed.