To recover the growing deficit between American and near-peer mobile artillery ranges, the US Army is exploring the use of the M982 Excalibur munition, a family of long-range precision projectiles. This paper aims to analyze the effectiveness of the M982 in comparison to the M795 and M549A1 projectiles to further the understanding of what this new asset contributes.,Based upon doctrinal scenarios for target destruction, a statistical analysis is performed using Monte Carlo simulation to identify a likely probability of kill ratio for the M982. A values-based hierarchical modeling approach is then used to differentiate the M982 from similar-type projectiles quantitatively in terms of several different attributes. Finally, sensitivity analyzes are presented for each of the value attributes, to identify areas where measures may lack robustness in precision.,Based upon a set of seven value measures, such as maximum range, effective range, the expected number of rounds to destroy a target, and the unit cost of a munition, the M982 1a-2 was found to be best suited for engaging point and small area targets. It is noted, however, that the M795 and M549A1 projectiles are likely better munition options for large area targets. Hence, an integrated targeting plan may best optimize the force’s weapon systems against a near-peer adversary.,The findings provide initial evidence that doctrinal adjustments in how the Army uses its artillery systems may be beneficial in facing near-peer adversaries. In addition, the values-based modeling approach offered in this research provides a framework for which similar technological advances may be examined.
[1]
L. Baranowski.
Effect of the mathematical model and integration step on the accuracy of the results of computation of artillery projectile flight parameters
,
2013
.
[2]
Sungsoo Park,et al.
Targeting and scheduling problem for field artillery
,
1997
.
[3]
Michael S. Hollis.
Preliminary Design of a Range Correction Module for an Artillery Shell.
,
1996
.
[4]
Patrick J. Driscoll,et al.
Decision Making in Systems Engineering and Management
,
2007
.
[5]
James A Matts,et al.
Artillery Accuracy: Simple Models to Assess the Impact of New Equipment and Tactics
,
1990
.
[6]
Ankur Singhal,et al.
Trajectory Correction Flight Control System using Pulsejeton an Artillery Rocket
,
2008
.
[7]
Jan Palczewski,et al.
Monte Carlo Simulation
,
2008,
Encyclopedia of GIS.
[8]
Dennis M. Guzik.
A Markov model for measuring artillery fire support effectiveness
,
1988
.
[9]
Mark Costello.
Extended range of a gun launched smart projectile using controllable canards
,
2001
.
[10]
Mark Costello.
Range extension and accuracy improvement of an advanced projectile using canard control
,
1995
.
[11]
Chee Meng. Fann,et al.
Development of an Artillery Accuracy Model
,
2006
.
[12]
P. Chusilp,et al.
Investigating an iterative method to compute firing angles for artillery projectiles
,
2012,
2012 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM).