Will American battleships be able to bombard Moscow with nuclear missiles from the SLRC?

One of the most curious projects of the Pentagon can be considered the Strategic Long Range Cannon (SLRC) - an ultra-long-range cannon designed to hit targets at a distance of up to 1000 nautical miles (1,8 thousand kilometers). But why does the American army need an artillery gun, albeit one with such unique characteristics, in our age of missile systems, UAVs, artificial intelligence and satellite navigation? Isn't the SLRC a complete and completely hopeless anachronism?

"Supergun"

First, you need to say a few words about the alleged performance characteristics of this product. Information about this artillery system is very fragmentary; there is no exact information either on the caliber or on the length of the barrel. In the public domain there is a certain picture, which depicts a weapon of obviously very large dimensions, having a powerful carriage with a base plate and horizontal aiming mechanisms for circular firing. The Strategic Long Range Cannon should be transported by a heavy wheeled tractor Oshkosh M1070 HETS (8x8) with a three-axle semi-trailer. The gun crew is calculated from 8 people. An incredible flight range of 1000 nautical miles, or 1852 kilometers, which is tens of times greater than the range of existing artillery systems, is designed to provide an active-rocket projectile, in fact, a rocket with a two-stage jet engine.




But why, one wonders, the United States with its Air Force, 11 AUG in the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Ground Forces also have a giant cannon?

It is assumed that such a long-range large-caliber gun will be able to seriously compete with short and medium-range missiles due to the high accuracy of destruction and the difficulty in intercepting a heavy projectile flying at high speed. At the same time, the US military has set a goal to reduce the cost of one shot to 400-500 thousand dollars, which makes the use of SLRC even more attractive compared to missiles. A battery of 4 guns will be able to fire for a long time, sending more ammunition to the target, while it is quite mobile and can be transported to a new location and prepared for firing in just half an hour. Despite its impressive size, the SLRC can be airlifted by military transport aircraft and transported by heavy tractors.

All this, of course, is very "great" if such an artillery system were not developed against you and me to break through the positions of Russian or Chinese troops. But recently there has been a glimmer of hope that this project will be either canceled or suspended by the Pentagon. In the US military budget for 2022, funding for the SLRC is no longer requested, but instead the army is asking for money for a broader spending item called Technology Maturation Initiative (TMI) Planning for Super-System and Technology Product Prototyping:


Is this the inglorious ending of the "supergun" or, on the contrary, the beginning of something more sinister?

Nuclear cannon

Let's remember where the legs of the Strategic Long Range Cannon project come from. Its progenitor is considered the "atomic cannon" M65, nicknamed Atomic Annie. Faced with German railroad artillery during World War II, the Americans wanted a similar one, starting work on a long-range 240-mm cannon under the T1 designation. In 1947, the US Air Force, with its atomic bomb, became a separate branch of the military, and the Ground Forces wanted their own "atomic cannon." On the basis of T1 developments, the T1950 project was launched in 131, which envisaged the creation of a new 280-mm transportable gun. A gun with the M65 index entered the troops in 1956, where it received the nickname Atomic Annie ("Atomic Annie").

This artillery system had a total mass of 83,3 tons, the total length in the stowed position was 26 meters, in the combat position - 12 meters. The maximum speed of its transportation reached 70 km / h on the highway, the gun could be deployed into a combat position in just half an hour. Note that "Atomic Annie" had two types of ammunition at once: high-explosive and nuclear. The mass of the high-explosive under the T122 index was 272 kg, and it carried 55 kg of explosives. The initial velocity of the projectile reached 760 m / s, and the maximum firing range was 28,7 km. Much more dangerous was the shell filled with 50 kilograms of enriched uranium. W9 had a length of 1,38 m and a mass of 364 kg, a flight speed of 630 m / s, and a range of 20-24 km. The power of the W9 nuclear explosion reached 15 kt TE. The next-generation nuclear projectile, indexed W19, had a speed of up to 720 m / s and a flight range of up to 28 km. A total of two dozen "atomic guns" were fired. During tests called "Upshot-Knothole" in 1953 at a test site in Nevada, the US military successfully fired a W9 nuclear projectile at a conditional target.

So why did we make this excursion into history? If you add two and two, then you can make the assumption that the Pentagon is carefully working towards re-equipping its army with tactical nuclear missiles. A range of 28 kilometers of aimed fire is not serious in the age of missile systems, but 1852 kilometers is a completely different matter. The high flight speed and the large mass of the active-rocket projectile will greatly complicate the task of air defense / missile defense to intercept it. It is not hard to guess against whom such an ultra-long-range weapon can be used. The American popular science magazine Popular Mechanics writes in plain text that the SLRC can be installed on battleships:


"Montana" is a series of American battleships that were supposed to replace Iowa, about which we are in detail told previously. By the way, the Pentagon has preserved all four Iowa-class battleships, turning them into museum ships, and is able to return them to service within a few months. That is, four battleships can act as carriers for the Strategic Long Range Cannon, and if necessary, the US Navy can return to the more advanced Montana project.

Worst of all, the SLRC can be used against our country as well. Thus, analysts from Popular Mechanics point out that with a projectile range of 1852 kilometers from the Montana, the western part of Russia and even Moscow may be bombarded from the North Sea. Most likely, the targets for nuclear missiles should be elements of the anti-missile defense of our capital, as well as infrastructure facilities of the RF Ministry of Defense on the western flank.

If the Pentagon's plans are really that, then developing the Strategic Long Range Cannon ultra-long-range weapon does make sense, as opposed to firing conventional conventional ammunition. By the way, available Technology allow the United States to very quickly recreate arsenals of tactical nuclear weapons. There would be something to shoot them from.