M270 MLRS and M142 HIMARS Developments

It sounds like they want to go double the range of PrSM and likely travel that distance faster. I do not see how that is possible on anything like a HIMARS chassis.
 
Josh_TN said:
It seems only marginally longer compared the huge performance increase they are suggesting. I do not see how they get to that range and speed without a ramjet.
Click to expand...
But if PrSM is claiming 500-650km with a 432mm x 4m missile and 90kg warhead, then with a 650mm x 5m missile (assuming the image shows 8 300mm x 5m missiles), may well be able to make 1,000km, even with a larger warhead.

On an aside, stumbled across this French patent.

FR2696535A1 - Artillery piece with stato-reactor stage to accelerate projectiles - has barrel and stato-reactor combined in one-piece unit - Google Patents

The weapon consists of a barrel (11) and a stato-reactor stage (12) fed with a gas mixt., the combustion of which accelerates the projectile with the barrel and stato-reactor stage aligned along the same axis and joined to form a single rigid component. The stato-reactor stage incorporates a...
patents.google.com
 
kqcke for you said:
They probaly just want to kill Puls in europe. GMARS more or less offers all of Puls advantages with the MFOF. After all if Puls wins it could mean less GMLRS ( GMLRS-ER, PrSM) are bought. Still if GMARS does have the capability for longer missiles then i don't see a reason for Puls. Both EXTRA and Predator Hawk are not really better than GMLRS, GMLRS-ER, Atacms and PrSM.
Click to expand...
That only works if they can offer HIMARS in a reasonable timeframe. GMARS is, not to put too fine a point on it, an absolute unit, and a lot of countries are looking for something with a HIMARS footprint.
 
MihoshiK said:
That only works if they can offer HIMARS in a reasonable timeframe. GMARS is, not to put too fine a point on it, an absolute unit, and a lot of countries are looking for something with a HIMARS footprint.
Click to expand...
But that ain't Puls either. Many User in Europe already bought some Himars but may want the capability for more. I would also guess that IT wont be long until we see the GMARS launcher on a tracked vehicle.
 
TsrJoe said:
en.m.wikipedia.org

Convention on Cluster Munitions - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
Russian cluster munition use:
news.un.org

Ukraine war: Russia used cluster weapons at least 24 times, says UN’s Bachelet

Credible reports indicate that Russian armed forces have used cluster munitions in populated areas of Ukraine, at least two dozen times since they invaded on 24 February, UN rights chief Michelle Bachelet said on Wednesday.
news.un.org news.un.org
30 March 2022
Credible reports indicate that Russian armed forces have used cluster munitions in populated areas of Ukraine, at least two dozen times since they invaded on 24 February, UN rights chief Michelle Bachelet said on Wednesday.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org

Use of cluster munitions in the Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
www.hrw.org

Ukraine: Apparent Russian Cluster Munition Attack

Nine civilians were killed and more than a dozen injured in an apparent Russian cluster munition attack on July 8, 2023, in a residential district of the Ukrainian town of Lyman. Russia’s repeated use of cluster munitions since the start of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has...
www.hrw.org www.hrw.org
www.hrw.org

Cluster Munition Use in Russia-Ukraine War

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, Russian armed forces have used cluster munitions in attacks that have caused hundreds of civilian casualties and damaged civilian objects, including homes, hospitals, and schools. The Ukrainian military has not denied credible...
www.hrw.org www.hrw.org
www.hrw.org

Growing Civilian Toll from Russian Cluster Munition Attacks

Russian forces’ repeated use of cluster munitions has caused predictable and lasting harm to hundreds of Ukrainian civilians, Human Rights Watch said today in releasing the 100-page global Cluster Munition Monitor 2022 report. Both Russia and Ukraine should reject the use of cluster munitions...
www.hrw.org www.hrw.org
1719339139426.png

Russian AP mine use:
www.hrw.org

Landmine Use in Ukraine

This background briefing surveys the types of landmines used in Ukraine since the full-scale Russian invasion began on February 24, 2022. Antipersonnel mines explode by the presence, proximity, or contact of a person, and can kill and injure people long after armed conflicts end.
www.hrw.org www.hrw.org
www.nbcnews.com

Two years after the Russian invasion, land mines plague one-third of Ukraine

Mines, including a deadly new Russian version, litter an area roughly the size of Florida, undermining an international effort to ban the weapons.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
www.hrw.org

Ukraine: Banned Landmines Harm Civilians

Human Rights Watch documented numerous cases in which rockets carrying PFM antipersonnel mines, also called “butterfly mines” or “petal mines,” were fired into Russian-occupied areas near Russian military facilities. Ukraine is a state party to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, which prohibits any use...
www.hrw.org www.hrw.org
1719339460051.png
 
It's rather hypocritical of the Russians to be complaining about the Ukrainians using cluster-munitions when the Russian army has been firing them in large numbers indiscriminately with no regard for civilian casualties.
 
NMaude said:
It's rather hypocritical of the Russians to be complaining about the Ukrainians using cluster-munitions when the Russian army has been firing them in large numbers indiscriminately with no regard for civilian casualties.
Click to expand...
And then they complain because they decided to sunbathe in a war zone next to a military target and shot down a missile over a beach they occupied.

1719389077979.png
 
Josh_TN said:
It sounds like they want to go double the range of PrSM and likely travel that distance faster. I do not see how that is possible on anything like a HIMARS chassis.
Click to expand...
Forest Green said:
But if PrSM is claiming 500-650km with a 432mm x 4m missile and 90kg warhead, then with a 650mm x 5m missile (assuming the image shows 8 300mm x 5m missiles), may well be able to make 1,000km, even with a larger warhead.
Click to expand...

US have previously said that there is an aim to get PrSM to over 800km in the near term, and trials may have already taken place that approach that. The initial goal of 499km was very much treaty limited, which is pretty much in the bin now, appears the rocket and with different trajectory may be capable of far more even in its initial versions.
kqcke for you said:
It is a Himars with another set of wheels.
Click to expand...

Suspect just a placeholder at present. French want to replace their M270 LRU with a French development.

But....like the European PULS users are finding out manufacturers promises of compatability with standard GMLRS pods are only credible if they are backed up by actual signed contracts/agreements with the US...turns out that sales pitch was a little off the mark. Zero incentive for the US to enable an Israeli competitor...

The issue in Europe at present is too many panicking and going off and doing their own thing....PULS purchases (which the German's are already questioning), French new system, GMARS, Chunmoo, HIMARS for Poland/Romania etc, M270A2 for UK....and thats just the platforms....I personally think the PULS purchases in particular are insane given Israeli's blocking of transfer of munitions to Ukraine and the political cost...let alone incompatability with GMLRS etc.

The sensible thing would have been for everyone to get together and re-hash the old GSRS requirement/agreement that let to M270 adoption and rocket production in the 1980's. Everyone forgets that it was a multinational requirement/procurement. It would have satisfied everyone. US would have had to give some ground that they've claimed via continuing to develop the platform and munitions since those days, but it would be beneficial in terms of removing Korean/Israeli competition, NATO standardisation and increased production capacity/facilities...

A range of launchers....M270A2, HIMARS from the US, GMARS from Germany and France under the KNDS brand (to keep them happy)...and if necessary resurrect the already developed LIMAWS(R) from the UK. Heavy tracked, Heavy Wheeled, Medium Wheeled and Light Wheeled launchers....a choice for everyone...and every circumstance....perhaps a towed version to keep Think Defence happy...

Then standardise on...
GMLRS-ER - But including European licenced production to increase capacity like the M26 days...
PrSM - US production only, no need for additional lines

But the key thing is then opening the architecture of the launch containers/system up for others to develop compatible munitions...that benefits the platform, users and ultimately the US as it keeps people on the same architecture, and bulk of the orders will always be for GMLRS-ER and PrSM...the alternative is to see people leave the platform and go elsewhere...

You then get real buy in....and the UK can develop LPS, LRAE....Germany can develop JFS-M and a replacement for AT-2 (turns out remotely deployed mines are a good thing), French can develop Thundart...and whatever...and the Poles can go and add an unguided 122mm pod as they love those things...

But I think we've missed the boat...which is so, so dumb and misses the key lessons from Ukraine of stockpiles, compatability and production capability...

The only other thing I'd add is to start cluster munition warhead, submunition and remote minelaying versions again....whilst very unpleasant it turns out they're incredibly effective....perhaps with the proviso that they're only for use against states that don't observe the Mine and Cluster Munitions conventions....i.e. Russia and China...
 
Last edited:
...It's literally another vehicle driving into the shed. That's not the profile of a M270!

God, could they at least edit their propaganda to make it look proper?
 
Forest Green said:
Russia claims to have destroyed M270 MLRS, which changed shape during a video cut.
Click to expand...

That's not the first time they've claimed to destroyed one (Usually those "HIMARS" or "M270"s turned out to be well designed decoys).
 
NMaude said:
So the US Army is putting the ATACMS back into production? No doubt in response to what is going on in Ukraine and with how skilfully the Ukrainian army has used the MGM-140, I wonder a kit will be developed to enable the ATACMS to be launched from an aircraft?
Click to expand...

This is a contract "in support of international orders" not for the US Army itself. So quite possibly Poland and/or Ukraine.

Post in thread 'Vought JTACMS/ATACMS (MGM-140)' https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/vought-jtacms-atacms-mgm-140.28752/post-692124
 
These new production ATACMS missiles could be also used by the US Army to start replacing their oldest ATACMS missiles (Some must be reaching the expiry date for their rocket-motors) and then send the old stock to Ukraine.
 
NMaude said:
These new production ATACMS missiles could be also used by the US Army to start replacing their oldest ATACMS missiles (Some must be reaching the expiry date for their rocket-motors) and then send the old stock to Ukraine.
Click to expand...
I thought that PrSM was completely replacing ATACMS? So absolutely no US ATACMS buys, it's all going to be PrSMs.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom