Kevin Brooks
How many smart AT packages have we fielded for the arty systems? None, other
than Copperhead, which has a mixed record. We have tested some, and gotten
to the almost-ready-to-field stage, but not actually fielded them. That
*may* change with the new GMLRS (guided MLRS)...there was some talk about
fielding a smart submunition package for it and for ATACMS.

But there are non-US systems, like the Swedish Strix, which
is a 120mm mortar fired guided AT round. At least on paper,
it seems very formidable with autonomous guidance, target
search and prioritization, and a decent-sized top-attack
warhead. The Brittish 80mm Merlin was rather similar, although
mm-wave radar rather than IR, but I recall that it was cancelled.

I find it surprizing that the US hasn't adopted any smart
artillery rounds, except the Copperhead, which really isn't
all that smart (non-autonomous). Especially considering the
hype that was there already in the 80's about cargo rockets
with autonomous AT-munitions that would render massed MBT usage
obsolete (again ... Eg plans of Lance carrying dozens of
such munitions.

Perhaps the fact that none was fielded has something to do
with the end of the cold war. Speculatively, if it was seen
that the AH's (etc) that they already had were sufficient to
deal with any armour threat out there? Otoh, it's interesting
that Sweden would come up with such a round. Do they perhaps
see it the other way around, as a substitute for the attack
helos they don't have?

I don't see us facing any bad guys who can overmatch our
counterbattery, and the ever important firefinder radars,
capabilities.

Unlikely yes, but I could think of rapidly deployed
light 'speed-bump' infantry getting into trouble lacking
sufficient arty. Mogadishu perhaps illustrates in a
small scale that even US troops can find themselves on the
ground without sufficient support.