US Army - Lockheed Martin Long Range Precision Fires (LRPF)

The SDBI and SDBII are very manoeuvrable so they probably would be hard to intercept.

I think the SBD II has a mode for coordinating attacks against a static position, but outside of that I'm unaware of any manuevering capability. Minimally both are always subsonic, so their ability to dodge SAM fire is probably less than something that is just ballistic and fast.
 
All of those points do not back the claim that HIMARS, M270 and GMARS are not "closed architecture". If they were open architecture you'd be able to adapt the launchers to different missiles, adapt the launchers to receive guidance from multiple sources, and adapt your missile pods to work from different launchers. All of those points listed talk about how the equipment is currently being used, that's like saying Apple is open source because it's used worldwide, is made in huge quantities, and can be operated all over Europe...

Unless they want to make the claim that GMARS is open architecture because we can put it on any chassis you want! Which is really stretching what open architecture means in the sense of an MLRS system.
 
All of those points do not back the claim that HIMARS, M270 and GMARS are not "closed architecture". If they were open architecture you'd be able to adapt the launchers to different missiles, adapt the launchers to receive guidance from multiple sources, and adapt your missile pods to work from different launchers. All of those points listed talk about how the equipment is currently being used, that's like saying Apple is open source because it's used worldwide, is made in huge quantities, and can be operated all over Europe...

Unless they want to make the claim that GMARS is open architecture because we can put it on any chassis you want! Which is really stretching what open architecture means in the sense of an MLRS system.
Just because something can be done, doesn't mean anyone wants to. As regards using guidance form other sources, IBCS facilitates that:

The scenario involved the IBCS-integrated air defense system detecting the launch of a ballistic missile, determining its launch point and transmitting the coordinates to AFATDS, which was used to direct the fire of High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) launchers.
 

:D


I'm thinking the peak speed must be around Mach 5 or more to reach that range.

View attachment 682173







View attachment 682174
View: https://x.com/rockfish31/status/1405302899224182786
 
Last edited:
Defense Updates has put out a video about the PrSM being used to hit a moving target in the upcoming Valiant Shield 24 exercise:


The U.S. Army's new Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) short-range ballistic missile has successfully been used against a moving target at sea for the first time as part of Valiant Shield 24.
On June 16, two PrSM missiles were launched during SINKEX from the Army's Autonomous Multi-Domain Launcher (AML) in Palau, Micronesia.
This marked the first time the PrSM and AML were deployed outside the United States, according to the Army. The systems were operated by the Army’s 3rd Multi-Domain Task Force (3MDTF) and the 1-181 Artillery Regiment of the Tennessee National Guard.
Valiant Shield 24, a multinational field training exercise held from June 7-18, took place in Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, and the surrounding sea in the Mariana Island Range Complex. According to the U.S. Navy, the exercise focused on integrating interoperability in a multi-domain environment, with joint forces collaborating to detect, locate, track, and engage units at sea.
The target for the SINKEX maneuvers was the decommissioned Austin-class amphibious transport dock ex-USS Cleveland (LPD-7), positioned in the North Pacific Ocean about 75 km (45 miles) from the nearest land.
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes what is the implication of PrSM hitting moving ship in Valiant Shield 24 ?
Chapters:
00:11 INTRODUCTION
04:10 GREATER RANGE, ENGAGE MOVING TARGET AND BETTER LETHALITY
 
Last edited:
I do not understand why they would not at least lengthen the gun a little before buying more.
Probably contract laws.

Changing barrels is a major change to the design, which would need to be re-bid, while buying a bunch more of the same as we already have can just be awarded to the old winner.

And frankly, new, longer barrels are easy to do, just need to decide how long a tube they're going to buy.
 
I'm sure where I pulled that story from said they were, but now I've lost it and can't find it.
Right. As I understand it, that's as a separate program of record and they're doing each battery as a group as the barrels need to be replaced. Since the artillery barrels have a ~3000rd life, a combat deployment will usually burn through a barrel a month.
 
Last edited:
With a little piece of paper saying, "Fire me."

Ooo, this is getting more interesting.

The United States will deploy to Germany a range of advanced ground-launched weapons, including the SM-6 multi-purpose missile and Tomahawk cruise missile as well as “developmental hypersonic weapons” — a reference to the yet-to-be-fielded Dark Eagle
1720724486593.png
 
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom