- Joined
- 21 April 2009
- Messages
- 13,371
- Reaction score
- 6,543
Missiles, Space PEO Focused on Surge Capacity, Integrated Fires
Missiles, Space PEO Focused on Surge Capacity, Integrated Fires
So the ATACMs can be given to Ukr quicker..Missiles, Space PEO Focused on Surge Capacity, Integrated Fires
Missiles, Space PEO Focused on Surge Capacity, Integrated Fireswww.nationaldefensemagazine.org
That's a Navy article, not Army.![]()
The Need to Invest in Long-Range Fires - War on the Rocks
If a naval aviator quotes from the movie Top Gun in the wardroom, they are going to have to buy a round of beers for the squadron. We are prepared to bewarontherocks.com
nothing has changed if ur one shot wonder missiles are expended ur done.. no slrc no win.![]()
What's needed for integrated fires?
Army leaders explain what capabilities will be necessary for the Defense Department's goal of integrated fires.www.defensenews.com
"hyperactive and high volumn threat"
they know w/o SLRC w. RPM they will be overmatched overrun etc.
How exactly do you propose to make a cannon reach 1000km?nothing has changed if ur one shot wonder missiles are expended ur done.. no slrc no win.
So does this mean it's in the LRIP phase?
Sort of sounds like they are procuring quite a few for "test and evaluation" then transitioning straight to FRP.
Why? Hell, they used to put stuff into service while it was still being developed.Going straight from eval to FRP, isn't that rather risky?
Why? Hell, they used to put stuff into service while it was still being developed.
Each Early Operational Capability production lot is essentially the LRIP phase of the program. EOC 1 is being delivered now, EOC 2 from next year.Per the Twitter thread, it already has been.
However, this document has an interesting statement that there is NO LRIP for PrSM. Sort of sounds like they are procuring quite a few for "test and evaluation" then transitioning straight to FRP.
EOC 2 from next year.
I'd think not at all. Ukraine isn't getting them.Given the events in Ukraine what are the odds the delivery schedule will be accelerated?
It's interesting. They used to call it, "Emergency Capability" when they were getting something into service ASAP.Each Early Operational Capability production lot is essentially the LRIP phase of the program. EOC 1 is being delivered now, EOC 2 from next year.
But the more PrSMs the US gets, the more ATACMS can be sent to Ukraine.I'd think not at all. Ukraine isn't getting them.
Early Operational Capability may be a different contracting protocol than Emergency Capability.It's interesting. They used to call it, "Emergency Capability" when they were getting something into service ASAP.
One would assume that that would be highly dependent on the plan and schedule (and how they've performed against it) for upgrading HIMARS and M270's for PrSM. ATACMS is available to 100% of the FA launchers at the moment. PrSM perhaps to less than a dozen test launchers. I think the Army is running behind on its original software development plan.But the more PrSMs the US gets, the more ATACMS can be sent to Ukraine.
Early Operational Capability may be a different contracting protocol than Emergency Capability.
I'd think not at all. Ukraine isn't getting them.
But the more PrSMs the US gets, the more ATACMS can be sent to Ukraine.
That's not what I meant, more PrSM's sooner means that more MGM-140s can be released to Ukraine.
This!
I hear this argument a lot. Honestly, how does one determine the impact in Army's planning of knowing something that exists with an ability to be brought back if in a pinch? Surely the Army will consider that as it makes its trades in which systems to invest in??I think once the decision was made to let lose with cluster munitions, that opened up a lot of ATACMs that the US didn't plan on using anyway.
I think that the big problem with US cluster warheads was the sheer number of duds that ensued. Much higher than anyone expected, IIRC.I hear this argument a lot. Honestly, how does one determine the impact in Army's planning of knowing something that exists with an ability to be brought back if in a pinch? Surely the Army will consider that as it makes its trades in which systems to invest in??
The deployment of the new Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) by the US Army getting closer following a "successful" short-range test conducted this week at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. Both the service and the prime contractor - Lockheed Martin have confirmed this development.
The US Army revealed that the weapon was launched for its first production qualification test flight from the M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS).
The service wrote :
“Preliminary results from the test show the Precision Strike Missile Increment 1 missile performed nominally in terms of predicted flight trajectory, lethality, near-vertical engagement angle, and height of burst. A final flight test report is anticipated in December 2023.”
The max dud rate for US cluster munitions hover below 5 percent of them per weapon. Seen everywhere from 1 percent to 3 percent depending on generation. Which may not sound like alot but 2.5 percent of 100 is still 3 of the things.I think that the big problem with US cluster warheads was the sheer number of duds that ensued. Much higher than anyone expected, IIRC.
So while the US wasn't willing to sign that treaty banning them, since we were stuck in COIN/occupation fights for the last 30+ years (Desert Storm 1991 and on) it was good policy to limit the use of cluster munitions in places where we're going to have troops for decades.
And if the gloves come off you can still dig the old stuff out of the arsenals for use.
And when the typical MLRS strike is 12 rocket times 644 warheads per rocket, that's some 240 duds per strike at 3% duds...The max dud rate for US cluster munitions hover below 5 percent of them per weapon. Seen everywhere from 1 percent to 3 percent depending on generation. Which may not sound like alot but 2.5 percent of 100 is still 3 of the things.
The service also tapped a Lockheed team and a Raytheon Technologies-Northrop Grumman team this year to work on competing PrSM Inc 4 designs that can fly more than 1,000 km, possibly double the range of the current version.
he U.S. Army has successfully flight tested a new seeker that will help transform its new Precision Strike Missile short-range ballistic missile into weapon that can strike moving ships and enemy air defenses.
Also known as the Strategic Mid-Range Fires System, its Tomahawk and SM-6 missiles cover the range gap of 310 to 1,800 miles between the MDTF’s Precision Strike Missile and Dark Eagle Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon