Costly U.S. Excalibur shell falters against Russian jamming

A senior Ukrainian official has publicly questioned the effectiveness of a high-tech American artillery round, the M982 Excalibur, citing its vulnerability to Russian electronic warfare tactics.

 

This critique, emerging from the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, raises broader questions about the reliability of advanced weaponry in modern battlefields where electronic countermeasures are increasingly prevalent.

While the Excalibur was once hailed for its pinpoint accuracy, its reported shortcomings highlight a technological arms race that could reshape how militaries around the world design and deploy precision-guided munitions.

The shell uses a combination of GPS and inertial navigation systems to strike targets with a circular error probable of less than four meters, meaning it can land within about 13 feet of its intended mark. This accuracy allows it to engage enemy positions, bunkers, or vehicles while minimizing collateral damage, a critical feature for operations near civilian areas or friendly forces.

With a range of approximately 25 miles when fired from standard howitzers like the M777, and up to 43 miles in tests with advanced systems, the Excalibur offers commanders the ability to hit distant targets without relying on air support.

Its folding glide fins extend its reach, and its warhead, weighing about 22 kilograms, can be configured for point detonation, delayed detonation, or height-of-burst to suit various targets. The shell’s price tag, often reported between $70,000 and $100,000 per round, reflects its sophisticated engineering but also underscores the stakes when its performance falters.

General Valeriy Zaluzhny, then Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, praised their accuracy in strikes along the Dnipro River, where they disrupted Russian positions shelling the city of Mykolaiv. Early reports suggested the shells hit their targets with a success rate of around 70%, a remarkable improvement over unguided artillery, which can scatter rounds hundreds of feet from their aim point.

The Excalibur’s ability to strike with a single shot, rather than requiring multiple rounds to bracket a target, meant Ukrainian gunners could conserve ammunition and reduce their exposure to counter-battery fire. For a military facing a numerically superior opponent, this efficiency was invaluable.

These systems, such as the Krasukha-4 and Zhitel, emit powerful radio waves that jam satellite navigation, causing GPS-guided munitions to lose their lock on coordinates. Without precise guidance, the Excalibur’s trajectory becomes unreliable, and it may miss its target by dozens of meters or fail to detonate accurately.

By mid-2023, Ukrainian assessments noted a sharp decline in the shell’s success rate, with some estimates suggesting it fell to as low as 6%. This dramatic drop prompted Kyiv to scale back its use of the munition, and the U.S. eventually halted deliveries, citing the high failure rate.

A Washington Post report from May 2024 confirmed that Ukraine had informed Washington of these issues, highlighting how Russian jamming had eroded the shell’s battlefield utility.

The Excalibur does have an inertial navigation backup, which uses internal sensors to estimate its position based on acceleration and direction, but this is less precise, especially over long distances. Russian forces have honed their electronic warfare capabilities over the past decade, integrating systems like the Pole-21, which can disrupt GPS across wide areas.

These advancements have not only affected the Excalibur but also other Western-supplied munitions, such as the JDAM-ER bombs and HIMARS rockets, which rely on similar navigation technology.

In the early 2000s, insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan employed basic radio jammers to disable remote-controlled explosives, prompting the U.S. to develop frequency-hopping systems. More recently, Hezbollah has used Iranian-supplied jammers to interfere with Israeli drones, limiting their surveillance capabilities.

These examples illustrate a constant cycle in warfare: a new technology dominates until an adversary finds a way to counter it, sparking another round of innovation. The Excalibur’s struggles in Ukraine fit this pattern, serving as a reminder that no weapon is immune to adaptation.

For Ukrainian artillery crews, the Excalibur’s declining reliability has been a source of frustration. Gunners trained to expect near-perfect strikes have had to revert to older, less precise methods, firing volleys of unguided shells to ensure hits.

The psychological toll is also significant. Soldiers who once relied on the Excalibur’s precision now face uncertainty, knowing that a costly round might miss its mark, leaving a target intact and their position vulnerable.

The implications of this challenge extend far beyond Ukraine’s front lines. The conflict has become a testing ground for modern warfare, with nations like the United States, China, and others closely studying its lessons.

The U.S. Army is already investing in programs like the Precision Strike Missile, which combines multiple guidance modes to resist jamming. Meanwhile, adversaries are taking note. China, which fields its own GPS-guided artillery rounds like the BP-12A, is likely refining its electronic warfare systems to counter Western munitions, just as Russia has done.

Comparing the Excalibur to other nations’ artillery reveals both its strengths and its limitations. Russia’s Krasnopol, a laser-guided 152mm shell, offers precision comparable to the Excalibur but requires a spotter to illuminate the target, limiting its flexibility in contested environments.

China’s GP155A, another GPS-guided round, boasts a similar range but lacks the Excalibur’s proven combat record. Western systems like Germany’s Vulcano, which combines GPS and laser guidance, aim to address jamming vulnerabilities but remain in limited use.

Historically, the Excalibur proved its worth in earlier conflicts. In Iraq and Afghanistan, it allowed U.S. forces to strike insurgent positions in urban areas with minimal civilian casualties. A 2008 report from the U.S. Army noted that 92% of Excalibur rounds fired in Iraq hit within four meters of their targets, a feat unguided artillery could not match.

Its success led to widespread adoption by allies, including Canada, Australia, and India, which integrated the shell into their M777 howitzers. Yet those theaters lacked the electronic warfare capabilities seen in Ukraine.

The broader question is how militaries will adapt to this new reality. Electronic warfare is not a Russian monopoly; the U.S. has its own systems, like the AN/ALQ-249, designed to disrupt enemy communications and navigation. But the speed and scale of Russia’s jamming efforts in Ukraine have caught Western planners off guard.

A 2023 article in The Economist detailed how Excalibur shells began failing en masse in early 2023, with weeks passing without a successful hit. This prompted urgent discussions between Kyiv and Washington, with Ukraine pushing for software upgrades to restore the shell’s accuracy.

While some patches have been applied to other systems, like the JDAM bombs, the Excalibur’s fate remains unclear. The U.S. decision to pause deliveries suggests a shift in priorities, possibly toward developing next-generation munitions less reliant on vulnerable technologies.

The U.S. has provided Ukraine with billions in aid, including over 3,000 Excalibur shells, according to Pentagon documents from 2022. When these munitions underperform, it fuels debates about defense spending and military priorities. Yet the issue transcends budgets.

The soldiers firing these rounds, whether Ukrainian or American in future conflicts, depend on their reliability. A missed shot isn’t just a statistic; it’s a moment when lives hang in balance, when a bunker stays intact, or a tank continues its advance.

Other nations are watching, and their innovations will follow. China’s growing electronic warfare capabilities, for instance, could pose similar challenges in a potential Pacific conflict. The human cost, too, remains a constant. Ukrainian gunners, adapting to these setbacks, embody the resilience of those caught in technological tug-of-war, their ingenuity as critical as the tools they wield.

This moment feels like a crossroads. The Excalibur’s promise of precision was real, but so is the reality of adaptation. Warfare evolves faster than headlines can capture, and today’s silver bullet is tomorrow’s lesson. The question lingers: can the U.S. and its allies outpace the jammers, or will the battlefield demand a new kind of accuracy—one we haven’t yet imagined?

***