| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Tech |
| Whatever Happened to Saddam's Super Cannon? |
| 2005-07-13 |
| Originally invented by Canadian astrophysicist Gerald Bull, this, or possibly these weapons (see link) could have radically altered the balance of power in the Middle East. The assumption, of course, would be that they have been dismantled and destroyed at some point after the fall of Iraq. But what if they still exist? The US army has had a long love affair with artillery, "The Queen of Battle", which in a conventional war is truly the master of the battlefield. I can imagine how much they would desire a weapon that they otherwise do not have, and immediately set to vastly improving its design for any number of purposes. But the gun is just a launch vehicle, and ordinary artillery tube writ large. The technology of the projectile is where such a weapon becomes very interesting. In this case, if such a weapon could "launch" a projectile into almost low orbit, then at its apex a rocket would accelerate it to amazing speed, it could possibly mimic a "space-based weapon" without a space launch platform. A 500 pound rocket propelling a 500 pound penetrating projectile towards a GPS-designated target could reproduce the effect of a meteorite. And as Saddam himself noted, "a missile can be launched only once but a cannon can be used repeatedly." So the question remains: were these weapons destroyed, and if so, why? |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #20 Anonymoose, your idea has much more value than what Sadaam bought. GPS guided artillery shells is a new (post Sadaam getting his gums examined on worldwide TV)idea. Sadaam's gun was just a chance for some yahoo's to steal his money, and based on his penchant for spending larged sums on velvet-Elvis lke desor for his palaces, it was money well spent. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2005-07-13 23:14 |
| #19 Guys... I think you really want a scaled up Sharp Gas Gun from LLL |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-07-13 22:16 |
| #18 I think this graphic would be appropriate for this story. |
| Posted by: Xbalanke 2005-07-13 17:15 |
| #17 Super Hose: the shot doesn't have to be terribly accurate, if you are using GPS guided munitions. Also, I'm betting that the US could fab up a dozen cannon like that, along with a bunch of replacement barrel tubing, overnight, then ship it off and assemble it where best to do the job, north or south. While it's best bet would be to use it as a very high altitude bunker buster, it would be used in concert with cruise missiles and and air power to devastating effect. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-07-13 14:21 |
#16 Sadaam was a better novelist than he was a military tactician.That's cold, SH. True, but cold. :-D (And he was a lousy novelist.) |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-07-13 13:38 |
| #15 As I remember from a show on Discovery or History Channel, the heat and pressure necessary to achieve the high muzzle velocity necessary to carry the distances proposed means that the barrel sections have to be replaced after six shots. Also artillery isn't that accurate. Sadaam was a better novelist than he was a military tactician. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2005-07-13 12:15 |
| #14 I think they're gonna use it to blast Hunter Thompson's ashes into space... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2005-07-13 11:58 |
| #13 The biggest advantages I see are that it could be assembled in a few *weeks*, just about as long as it would take to build the proper munitions, and would be one of the few really effective ways of taking down the Iranian nuclear infrastructure. For what? $100-200M a gun? That is peanuts! And not a damn thing the Iranians could do to stop it. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-07-13 11:55 |
| #12 Wasn't Bull's original design intended as a cheap space launch platform? The thing has many drawbacks as a weapon (e.g. it isn't mobile) but getting things into space is a different beast. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2005-07-13 11:02 |
| #11 Given that is most likely the Mossad that capped Bull the notion that they tipped the Brits and others (the propellant charges were being made in Belgium or Holland IIRC) makes sense. The 350MM proof of concept was test fired in Iraq although I have no idea of the range capability. The 1000MM version was partially delievered to Irag and the sections there where rendered into scrap while sitting in a storage area after the Gulf War. Where ever the sections ended up after that is problematic. IIRC Bull originally had proposed the concept of the super gun to the US Army. In this version it would of been capapble of traversing a full 360D but could not elevate. The art work for the proposal looked more like a large refractory telescope than anything else. Nova actually did a show on this in the early '90s. PBS is good for something sometimes. Now as to whether such a weapon would be a vialble weapons system given they worked. A number of these based inside the US would be immune to anything short of an inbound ballistic warhead. And they could threaten just about any target worth considering. There several gun systems under consideration now that IMO could bring about a new golden age for artillery systems. Enhanced ranges, GPS guidance etc. As I understand it the USN would eventually like to put to sea a gun system that would have ranges out to 500 to 600KM. Such projectiles would be launched fom elctromagnetic gun systems (rail guns) and would have flight profiles that take them out of the atmosphere. Sounds like to me they could be used as anti missile waepons. Just my $.02 |
| Posted by: Cheaderhead 2005-07-13 10:17 |
| #10 I remember seeing a documentary with US soldiers standing around pieces of that cannon after it was dismantled. Having said that, why not build another one? or ten, or hundred? |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2005-07-13 10:11 |
| #9 Only a smaller scale breech and barrel segments were built to provide proof of concept. They were assembled in Iraq and test fired. The main pieces were seized in Britain and were never sent to Iraq. They had been listed and tagged as oil pipeline parts to try and get them through customs. It's rumored that the Israeli Mossad tipped off the Brits. |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous2520 2005-07-13 09:34 |
| #8 My point was that such a weapon could fire projectiles towards Iran that would possibly be powerful enough to destroy deep underground nuclear installations. Protected by the US Air Force, three or four such guns could accomplish in short order, and at a fraction of the cost, what "space based weapons", like "the rods of god" are supposed to do someday. And even if Saddam's versions have been destroyed, we should consider re-creating them just for this purpose. That is, of an estimated 350 targets in Iran, many of which are extremely hardened, what better way to reduce them? |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-07-13 08:53 |
| #7 January 2002? What's next, Hitler's secret weapons that could ahve won the war? |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-07-13 08:18 |
| #6 As artillary the thing was of very little value,except as a terror weapon.It had very limited ability to traverse.Beside it would have had time for,maybe,1/2 dozen shots before it was turned into a smoking scrap heap. |
| Posted by: raptor 2005-07-13 08:05 |
| #5 The cannon is being reserved for Saddam's sentencing, when he will be shot out of the cannon without a net? Am I close? |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-07-13 04:34 |
| #4 Sold as scrap. Much if the important parts were never even made. Only the tube sections for the barrel. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet 0’ Doom 2005-07-13 02:14 |
| #3 It would have been no match for my "laser". |
| Posted by: Dr. Evil 2005-07-13 00:56 |
| #2 I'm pretty sure the cannon pieces were sold for scrap; I've heard speculation that it wouldn't have even worked well anyway. |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-07-13 00:41 |
| #1 Hopefully, the barrel sections have found a more useful home irrigating some farmers field. Shooting a supercannon is asking for a JDAM sandwich. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2005-07-13 00:17 |
