• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Excalibur Merged Thread

honestyrules

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
is saving innocent lives worth 150 grand a pop, especially children and women? yep

Exactly! And the whole Hearth & mind thing is hard to win when something like collateral damage/civilian casualties happens.

If the cost for firing an Excalibur is a concern, we won't even start to mention how much it costs to fire some of the Naval weapons.

Although, I`ve no idea of the price range for Naval weapons, It sounds expensive!!! And nobody question the price/use/necessity of those weapons. Somebody, somewhere will, one day, start to question the price tag of a pair of boots or something...
 

guns_and_roses

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Money shouldnt even be a matter. This shell will reduce civilian causalties, and ensure pin-point accuracy on targets for the soldiers in the action.
 

Yrys

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
civvy said:
Money shouldnt even be a matter.

If money wasn't a matter, the politics would never send the army outside of Canadians lands, afraid
of repercussion to theirs elections, no ?
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,004
Points
1,060
If these GPS rounds fail to detonate, I wonder if we will be required to go find the shell and explode it.  Considering it has GPS and electronics in it, I wonder if it's a security risk to leave it, beyond that of leaving large artty rounds for the taliban I mean.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,179
Points
940
Flawed Design said:
If these GPS rounds fail to detonate, I wonder if we will be required to go find the shell and explode it.  Considering it has GPS and electronics in it, I wonder if it's a security risk to leave it, beyond that of leaving large artty rounds for the taliban I mean.

I am sure the Chinese or Russians would pay well for an intact round, even more for a unfired one.
 

LordOsborne

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
lone bugler said:
is saving innocent lives worth 150 grand a pop, especially children and women? yep ;D

friendly fire is no joke either and if these shells give troops on the ground a little more piece of mind, I'd say my taxes are being used right


Not to mention the money saved in the long run by preventing collateral damage to private property, infrastructure, payouts to wounded or killed civillian families and healthcare costs of supporting soldiers / civillians that could potentially have been injured from a FF incident.
 

Petard

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
5
Points
380
Flawed Design said:
If these GPS rounds fail to detonate, I wonder if we will be required to go find the shell and explode it.  Considering it has GPS and electronics in it, I wonder if it's a security risk to leave it, beyond that of leaving large Arty rounds for the taliban I mean.

Considering the terminal velocity of the round of even a dud round, it is very unlikely anything worthwhile would survive the impact that would be usable in trying to reverse engineer the technology.
 

geo

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Flawed Design said:
If these GPS rounds fail to detonate, I wonder if we will be required to go find the shell and explode it.  Considering it has GPS and electronics in it, I wonder if it's a security risk to leave it, beyond that of leaving large artty rounds for the taliban I mean.

You volunteering for butt party?
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,274
Points
910
The Excalibur shell could very well be the most expensive conventional ammunition ever fired by the military.

Not even close.

In the Army alone, an ADATS round is worth far in excess of this.

In the Air Force, every guided weapon (sidewinder/sparrow/AMRAAM) would be more expensive.

In the Navy, Harpoon, Standard and Sea Sparrow all cost more per round than $150K

Yet, somehow, this is not an issue.  Nice fact checking.
 

AJFitzpatrick

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Strictly out of nomenclature currosity

Why is a shell that is precision guided and with its own propulsion not considered a missile? Is it strictly a matter of how it is launched?
 

ProPatria031

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
A good friend of mine was on the gun when the first one was fired, he said they don't use them because they are to expensive and they can pretty much do the job without. The Excalibur is a lot better but not an absolute necessity. One nice thing about them is that you can fire them in a built up cities and fire it over the city and have it drop straight down on top instead of at a angle.
 

muskrat89

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Obviously, they won't be using them FFE for every AN mission that comes along... They are a tool, like a smoke round, an illumination round, a special fuse, etc.

It is sickening that the same media that harps on the "human costs" of war in Afghanistan would question the value of a precision round such as this.
 

Welshy

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
The only situation I could see it being used in, is when air support is unavailable and a precise target needs to be hit. The cost of a JDAM, which does the same thing costs 22000$ plus aircraft operating costs. Although it is has a smaller explosive charge than the 500 lbs JDAM (which was the smallest variant I could find) which in that case it would have less collateral damage. So what does this round give us that we don't already have the capability for? Another tool in the belt?
 

muskrat89

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well, I haven't prowled a gunline for 12 years so I'm sure someone will be along with a much more insightful answer to your question.

Off the top of my head though, guns can fire in any weather conditions, day or night. Generally, I don't think the same can't be said about air support.
 

ProPatria031

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Plus you can't shoot a bullet out of the sky, it generally hits befor you even hear the gun, dont need to wait very long for the hit unlike planes might not be in your area or need to take off befor close air support arrives.
 

Welshy

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well fair enough, thats what I suspected. I was just curious if it had any other advantages. Also in Afghanistan we don't have our own CAS, so this would gives an opportunity of doing the equivalent which ends up being much cheaper than deploying the hornet and offsetting the cost of the expensive round.

Also there is an episode of future weapons that features the excalibur. Season 1, episode 5 if anyone is interested.
 

ProPatria031

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ya I saw it, I think that weapon is spectacular, other then the price tag. it was still a prototype that show, it was worth 500'000 bones :eek:
 
Reaction score
0
Points
0
They know the cost of everything (selective to fit their aggenda) and the value of nothing.
With  funeral costs  for CF members KIA in Afghanistan quoted at $1,000,000  taking out one bomb maker might prevent 1 to 3+ deaths from IEDs ect; thats 1 to3 million versus the cost of one Excaliber. The human costs in terms of collateral damage is considerable too. They aren't going to fire these things WWI style to cut wire.  :cdn:
 

vonGarvin

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
17
Points
430
AJFitzpatrick said:
Strictly out of nomenclature currosity

Why is a shell that is precision guided and with its own propulsion not considered a missile? Is it strictly a matter of how it is launched?
It is a missile (by definition)
An object or weapon that is fired, thrown, dropped, or otherwise projected at a target; a projectile.

 
Top