PICATINNY ARSENAL, N.J. - Project Officer for the XM1155 Extended Range Artillery Munitions Suite, Nick Berg’s, first look in 2018 at the Army’s potentially game-changing, long-range, precision cannon projectile with advanced lethality came in the form of descriptions and depictions on an evolving slide deck.
Berg’s organization, the Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) Armaments Center, along with the Fires Center of Excellence, Project Manager Combat Ammunition Systems (PM CAS), and later, the Long Range Precision Fires Cross-Functional Team, had been working together to clarify the scope, strategy and desired capabilities – such as range, accuracy, and lethality against specific targets and performance in different environments – that would define program success.
“The goal of our program was to extend the range of 155mm ammunition,” said Berg. “The further our projectiles go, the more standoff our warfighters can have. At the end of the day, what we’re doing is taking the warfighter out of the reach of the adversary.”
Prior to the initiation of the Extended Rage Artillery Munitions Suite (ERAMS) Science and Technology (S&T) Program, Army studies had shown that science may support the development of a cannon projectile with a significantly increased range yet with remaining capacity for precision-enabling components and a lethal payload.
Once the program commenced, Berg’s role was to advance and organize technology options through exploration, discovery and innovation to support the progressive development of the projectile. Berg’s team got government and industry working together and focused time and investments on Army needs. He then led tests in virtual reality and in live fires to mark progress.
Now, the ERAMS program has transitioned: It is, “something that went from a PowerPoint concept to something that was fired out of a gun,” said Berg.
“We provided estimates on given concept examples such as what worked really well and some downsides that might require more investment,” said Berg. “That’s our job in S&T, and I feel like we did that with this program.”
The ERAMS S&T project has transitioned to Product Manager, Extended Range Artillery Munitions (PdM ERAM), Mahmoud “Dave” Ahmad, who said he is preparing a program initiation brief to the Army Acquisition Executive. The PdM ERAM office is also awaiting responses to Requests for Prototype Proposals solicited from selected contractors based on white papers they previously submitted that were evaluated by the government team.
Technical Challenges
Faster developing programs are always desirable, but in the case of ERAMS, the time to develop long-range, precision cannon projectiles was commensurate with the technical challenges.
“We know from our experience in 155mm munition development that there are only so many ways that you can extend range,” said Berg. “One is with some kind of post-launch propulsion, one is if you could increase the muzzle velocity, and the other one is if you increased lift on your projectile.”
Various lift surfaces and airframe geometries, rocket and ramjet boosters, precision enabling electronics and other mechanisms were explored, but for any technology strapped to a 155mm cannon projectile the real test comes hard and fast: gun launch – 15,000-20,000 Gs of uber-heated acceleration that melts mere metals, shatters elegant electronics and ignites unintended energetics.
Once a technology passes gun launch, adjustments are frequently demanded. S&T teams manage the persistent challenge of finding the optimum balance of “trade-offs.”
In engineering, tradeoffs are commonplace, as limited space, weight, power and desire for more features always leads to difficult choices: getting more of one capability typically means taking from something else. Determining optimum balances – such as between range and lethality – was a challenging tradeoff throughout, explained Berg.
“We established an objectives hierarchy, that is a tree of scoring that you would get for executing certain objectives and certain missions,” said Berg. The objectives hierarchy helped to keep priorities always up front, he explained.
Communication was Key
Berg said that the ERAMS program was built on constant communication between offices and partners. “Especially during phase one, we held regular quarterly program reviews with our industry partners, stakeholders and technology leads from Armaments Center.”
“The goal of these reviews was to collaborate across parties to show industry what technologies could be leveraged from the government for their system concepts and serve as a means of communication for program goals and objectives,” said Berg.
Berg used solicitations with industry via the Defense Ordnance Technology Consortium where he received papers that described specifically how industry might accomplish the objectives, as well as ideas for component designs and other proposals.
“It’s our job as the government to validate those claims,” said Berg, but he explained that in a science and technology effort, after proposals are received and evaluated, the onus remains on moving the project forward.
“We go back and forth and help drive designs through analysis, through operational effectiveness modeling,” said Berg. “In our system effectiveness modelling division, we can run scenarios and simulations based on inputs from design, and we did that extensively on this program. We have tools that we can use to see if it will survive gun launch, or to advise what they need to do to help them survive gun-launch,” said Berg, who provided examples, such as different materials or assembly processes.
Experts with varying competencies from across the Armaments Center were available to evaluate projectile designs against different targets and how they would perform in different environments, such as in GPS-degraded or denied environments.
“We have folks who are the world’s best at developing warheads, so they might have ideas. We can step in and recommend that, ‘you can do this based on what we know about going after these types of targets.’”
“All of those are tools we have within our organization that we put into play for each of these industry designs,” said Berg.
“This program is really a good indicator of S&T success, starting with how we got the (project manager) and stakeholders involved early, found the concepts – DEVCOM had a major part in how these concepts were developed – we demonstrated them successfully, and it was passed on to PM CAS for further development.”
Berg said they worked with nine industry teams who each contributed to either enabling technologies or system concept development. Two industry teams, who produced system concepts, successfully completed engineering tests to show the integration and functionality of the prototypes fired from Army weapon systems. “We did a series of engineering tests leading up to a demonstration that showed it works as it was supposed to, that it survives gun launch, that it attains the desired range.
“That’s the way to go. That’s what we’re supposed to do,” said Berg.
Social Sharing