Ironworkerwill,
The Copperhead system of a 105 guided projectile fired in a sabot from a 155 gun/howitzer was in use by 1981. It required a laser designator to be effective that is the laser was shined on a target and the projo homed in on the laser signature. The designator then in use was some what larger and heavier than an M-60 machinegun and used from a tri pod, though experiments were being done with painting targets with a laser from the now failed Aquila Remotely Piloted Vehicle program.
Not much training took place as the rounds were VERY expensive and some felt another then new system would negate the need for Copperhead in Field Artillery use.
That system was the 155 Dual Purpose ICM (Improved Conventional Munitions) round, commonly referred to by the press and civilians as a cluster bomb. This round used a base ejecting projectile to launch a cloud of submunitions each consisting of a wire wraped shapped charge with a ribbon drogue to keep it in the right position to be effective on target and for the impact fuzing to work. Each munition had the capability to blow a hole in about 2.5 inches of cold rolled homogenius steel AND fragmentation effects not unlike that of the 40mm grenade used in the M79 and M203 Grenade launchers, that is a burst radius of 5 meters.
A round of Copperhead ammunition cost MANY times what a round of ICM cost AND required a laser team down range. The ICM round used fuze time or fuze VT that is an actual preset time for burst and ejection though the base or the VT fuze where in a proximity fuze is armed after a certain preset delay. Depending on the height and distance from target when the carrier functioned and ejected the submunitions the density and size of the pattern could be modified.
While a hit with a single submunition from a single gun firing may have been less than the chance of a hit with a much more powerful Copperhead, one could purchase a pile of ICM rounds for the same cost as a Copperhead.
Did the ICM work? A bunch of Iraqis in full retreat from Kuwait some years back seemed to think so. The Isrealis liked them a lot. They did unfortunately have a high dud rate when striking things not as hard as say an APC and so many have been concerned about the danger of unexploded ordinance (don't get me started on artillery delivered mines of both AT and APERS flavors)
My first experience with ICM cost me several cases of beer and the shame of loosing a bet with a Jarhead. I was considered something of a hot shot when it came to calls for fire and the Marine that was instructing US Army FA officers in Cannon battery basic that day bet me I could not in five rounds actually call an actual strike on an old APC out on a range at Ft. Sill. I actually had what was called rounds in effect, that is close enough that fragments actually struck the target, BUT no actual impact of a round itself on target. He upped the bet and gave me five more rounds and again I had rounds in effect but no strike. He then bet he could get a strike AND ON THE FIRST ROUND .
Of course I bet against him as I had just wasted ten rounds of taxpayers ammunition. He then used my firing data and called for something other than "HE Quick" None of us had ever heard of "ICM" so had no idea what to expect. The round came in and some what up range toward the gun from the target and somewhat high there was a greyish puff in the air and a cloud of small objects appeared spreading from their point of ejection. ( Spinning of projo causes dispersion)The target disappeared in multiple burst of gold light and blackish clouds. When the smoke cleared the burning vehicle had obviously suffered one or more actual strikes and the USMC cadre drank well that weekend.
I suppose that Copperhead had a big advantage on moving targets over ICM. We were told that training and experimenting with Copperhead (which unlike ICM HAD been discussed in the Basic Artillery course all artillerist went through before the gun dogs went on to our own training) because a shot had fallen short. Seems on a dusty day the incoming warhead had homed on the dust directly in front of the laser team, we were told. We had no volunteers to do call for Copperheads after hearing that anyway.
From what I understand talking to some youngsters, our ability to get steel on target with a paper map, and lensatic compass was some sort of magic or trickery. Given the improved accuracy of the guns and ammunition in use today and the use of military grade GPS for location and direction and hand held laser rangefinders they should have no issues with first rounds of todays conventional munitions in effect today.......
Maybe Copperhead has lost some of its value.....
Meanwhile I can not help but wonder if the money being spent on guided .50 caliber rounds might not be better spent on training time, live firing and more Plain Jane match ammo for .50 equipped snipers.
-kBob
