Talk:M982 Excalibur

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / European / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	European military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Accuracy Comparison

When I was in the artillery we seldom if ever corrected "dumb" fire by more than 150 - 200 meters (commonly much less), is there a source for the 400 meter claim in the article? Is US artillery really that poor? Usrnme h8er 05:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I provided a source. Note that the 370meter provided in globalsecurity is perhaps for the "maximum distance" where the artillery is firing I assume. -- Esurnir 04:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference: `In contrast, standard U.S. 155 mm shells have a CEP of 200 to 300 m at moderate ranges.`; i think the article will be highly improve if someone check the artillery chart and give a precise distance (ex; 10 km) with a certain type of gun (ex: triple 7) and correspondant CEP on first round before FOO correction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.210.83.183 (talk) 05:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what that source said 3 years ago, but today it says nothing of the sort in regards to the very high CEP number stated in the article. I have thus removed that sentence, as it seems odd and has no source. Pavuvu (talk) 14:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Need sources for the first operational usage

I just added the date of the first operational usage (may 23rd). I got it from here. I'm sorry I can't find a better source yet :(. If someone could link the original article in the ref, that would be great ! -- Esurnir 03:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Every comment on Randy Meece in the overview is factual. This is not vandalism and I possess emails from Government POCs who complimented his performance in Iraq. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wotring3 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The photo of the first operational use is dubious at best. I think it depicts a GBU-38 500-pound JDAM, not an M982 :) And the link to hood.army.mil doesn't work either. Best regards, K.K. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.232.15.57 (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Solution for Zumwalt-Class?

Could that stuff be a solution for the naval fire support requirements of the USMC? --78.49.234.191 (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Netherlands second european user after sweden?

The Netherlands is the second Excalibur lb customer in Europe after Sweden, the U.S. government's development partner for the 155 mm round. Deliveries are expected to begin later this year.
— http://www.asdnews.com/news-62799/Netherlands_Orders_Raytheon_Excalibur_Ib_Precision_Munitions,_Becomes_Second_European_Customer.htm

This is in contradiction with Germany listed in the current users list.

Wouter Halswijk 10:32, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

As I am reading this, the map and text don’t match: map shows Germany, which is not listed. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on M982 Excalibur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:48, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on M982 Excalibur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Raytheon-Bofors Excalibur

As the title says. An international name is preferred. Blockhaj (talk) 17:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested restructuring

I suggest that the article be re-organized with the sections (1) Design; (2) Procurement and production; (3) Use in combat. Right now, the use of the weapon in combat appears both in the Description and History sections, which is a bit confused. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prone to GPS Jamming

I read multiple times now already and it seems to be consensus among military analysts that the Excalibur has a less than 5% accuracy down from 80% at the start of the war. This is apparently due to very effective GPS jamming on behalf of russia. Gewure (talk) 00:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]