Developing Missile Forces & Artillery munition stock lists.

A necessary condition for attaining the goals of operations (engagements) by combined-arms force elements is the capability of Missile Forces & Artillery (MF & A) weapons to effectively engage various installations and facilities of enemy force groupings to the entire depth of their operational disposition. It is essential at the same time to keep in mind that enemy installations and facilities (platoon defensive positions, artillery batteries, command and control facilities, etc.) substantially differ from one another in the nature of the individual targets that compose them, their size, degree of protection and distances from the forward edge of the battle area. Hence, it becomes necessary to develop extensive stock lists of munitions (high explosive, canister, etc.) for all types of MF & A weapon system that can effectively engage these targets.

It stands to reason that, if there are the necessary funds, the fastest way to adopt into service of all types of advanced munitions is their simultaneous development. In conditions of economic constraints, however, this approach would increase, rather than cut, the time needed for adopting these munitions. In this case, as practical experience shows, they are likely to become obsolete even before their development deadlines. Therefore, in conditions of the tight economic restrictions, the wisest course of action is a consecutive development of long-term stock lists of munitions.

We think that in appraising the rationality of a stock list of MF & A munitions we should be guided by the following two particular indicators: first, the list's "degree of universality" and, second, "the level of lethal effects." The first indicator ([R.sub.1i]) is characterized by the relative number of types of enemy targets that can be effectively engaged by a weapon system using ammunition from the stock list that is being appraised, viz.,

[R.sub.1i] = [b.sub.i]/b, i = [bar.1,n], (1)

where [b.sub.i] is the number of types of enemy targets that can be effectively engaged by the i-type weapon system using ammunition from the stock list that is being appraised;

b is the number of enemy targets in the possible enemy force groupings;

n is the number of weapon systems in the MF & A.

The second indicator ([R.sub.2i]) is the mathematical expectation of the reduction in the rate of expending munition against enemy targets due to switching from the standard stock list of weapon systems to the stock list that is being appraised. This reduction for the i-type weapon system is found from the formula

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], (2)

where [N.sub.eij] is the rate of expenditure of the most effective munitions from the standard i-type weapon system stock list against j-type targets;

[N.sub.ij] is the rate of expenditure of the most effective munitions against j-type targets from the i-type weapon stock list that is being appraised;

[d.sub.j] is the share of j-type targets among possible enemy force groupings;

[X.sub.ij] is the indicator of the possibility of using against j-type targets by the i-type weapon system of both the standard stock list munitions and munitions of the stock list that is being appraised (it is equal to one if the i-type weapon system can use against j-type targets munitions from both the standard stock list and the stock list that is being appraised, and it is equal to zero if it cannot).

Based on the above particular indicators, we can offer an integral characteristic (Q) of the MF & A ammunition stock list that is being appraised:

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], (3)

where U is a relative number of enemy targets from amongst possible enemy force groupings that can be effectively engaged by MF & A if they use munitions from the stock list that is being appraised (the "degree of universality" of the MF & A munitions stock list);

g is the share of (relative number) MF & A units equipped with the i-type weapon system.

Calculations using expression (3) have shown the following.

Existing high-explosive fragmentation rounds (HEF), single-warhead precision artillery shells with semi-active homing heads (SAHH) and canister rounds (CR) with fragmentation warheads enable missile forces and artillery engage practically all types of enemy targets (the value of U is close to one). It is advisable to regard the collection of these types of munitions as standard for the combat arm.

The greatest expenses are involved in creating precision munition (canister shells with SAHH) because it calls for the use of high-tech and a new technical approach. Their development costs much more than the development of routine munitions like HEF and CR with shaped-charge fragmentation warheads (SCFW). The maximum reduction (compared to the standard stock list) of munition expenditure rate against standard enemy targets (an increase in the [R.sub.2i]) can be achieved through adoption of precision canister munitions.

The development and adoption of CR with SCFW and HEF of the next generation are less expensive compared to the development and adoption of precision munitions. The value of [R.sub.2i], however, will be lower than if precision canister rounds are included in the stock list. At the same time, a stock list that includes precision canister rounds with SCFW will be more rational compared to a stock list containing next generation precision shells with SAHH and HEF. Therefore, given the necessary funds, one should first of all develop precision canister munitions. In the absence of such funds, one should focus on adoption of CR with SCFW.

The adoption of munitions with selective effects (for example, munitions designed for jamming electronic assets) will help to considerably enhance the effectiveness of engagement of a limited number of target types. Owing, however, to a small number of similar targets in possible enemy force groupings, the effect of the above munitions upon the integral characteristic of the (Q) stock list is insignificant. At the same time, their development costs are comparable with precision munitions development costs. Thus, the development of munitions characterized by selective effects is advisable only if there are funds for the adoption of munitions of the remaining types.'

It should be noted that, in drawing up stock lists of munitions for advanced MF & A weapon systems, the maximum value of [R.sub.1i] can be attained if one develops in the first place high-explosive fragmentation munitions for cannon artillery systems; canister rounds with SCFW for multiple rocket launchers (MRL) and missile systems. This means that precisely these types of munition should be above all developed for advanced RF & A weapon systems.

We also think that, for munitions of the same tasking functions (for example, CR with SCFW or HEF), it is advisable to first develop the types designed for weapon systems that account for the biggest number in the combat arm.

With a view to reducing the number of problems to be solved in planning and scheduling of fires and provision of munitions to MF & A force elements it is necessary, first, to reduce the number of MRL types but enable them to use rocket projectiles of various calibers; second, to develop and adopt front-controlled, army, division, regimental and, perhaps, even battalion artillery weapon systems that have a unified caliber (if this condition is met, the stock list munitions of such weapon systems will only differ in types of their warheads).

To cut costs of developing munition stock lists, it is necessary to standardize munitions of identical tasking functions by equipping them with standard elements (fuses, homing heads, warheads, etc.).

Thus, the above approach to developing stock lists of RF & A munitions will facilitate more informed decisions with regard to assigning the limited funds intended for their development and provide for enhancing as far as possible the effectiveness of combat employment of the combat arm.

Col. A.S. ZAYTSEV

Candidate of Military Sciences

Col. V.I. GREBENYUK

Doctor of Military Sciences