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

[TomS]

Can an MK72 rocket not be put on a PRSM to make it fly further? After updating and improving it, you might try something like this. Obviously it'd have taken larger trucks as transport and launch platforms.

Probably could. It's a fairly expensive piece of kit. They used the ASROC booster on LRASM, I believe, likely because it's cheaper.

 

[sferrin]

Can an MK72 rocket not be put on a PRSM to make it fly further? After updating and improving it, you might try something like this. Obviously it'd have taken larger trucks as transport and launch platforms.

Probably could. It's a fairly expensive piece of kit. They used the ASROC booster on LRASM, I believe, likely because it's cheaper.

I wonder if it's also because they didn't need that much ISP. For example, they could have used the Tomahawk booster and passed on that as well.

 

[bring_it_on]

Based on this document the MK72 runs around half a million $ For something like the LRASM that would add around 17% to the cost of the missile for VL launch. For PrSM this would add about 50% of the cost of the baseline Army PrSM.

 

[TomS]

Can an MK72 rocket not be put on a PRSM to make it fly further? After updating and improving it, you might try something like this. Obviously it'd have taken larger trucks as transport and launch platforms.

Probably could. It's a fairly expensive piece of kit. They used the ASROC booster on LRASM, I believe, likely because it's cheaper.

I wonder if it's also because they didn't need that much ISP. For example, they could have used the Tomahawk booster and passed on that as well.

Could also be a matter of who makes it. Since VL LRASM remains a company initiative, IIRC, the fact that LM makes VL ASROC but not Tomahawk or Standard might have played a role in the booster selection.

 

[sferrin]

Can an MK72 rocket not be put on a PRSM to make it fly further? After updating and improving it, you might try something like this. Obviously it'd have taken larger trucks as transport and launch platforms.

Probably could. It's a fairly expensive piece of kit. They used the ASROC booster on LRASM, I believe, likely because it's cheaper.

I wonder if it's also because they didn't need that much ISP. For example, they could have used the Tomahawk booster and passed on that as well.

Could also be a matter of who makes it. Since VL LRASM remains a company initiative, IIRC, the fact that LM makes VL ASROC but not Tomahawk or Standard might have played a role in the booster selection.

That's probably it right there. Would have made integration easier.

 

[bobbymike]

The Precision Strike Missile’s rocket booster is so powerful that short-range shots actually put more stress on the weapon than letting it loose to fly its full distance, Lockheed told us

PRSM: Lockheed Long-Range Missile Passes Short-Range Stress Test - Breaking Defense

The Precision Strike Missile’s rocket booster is so powerful that short-range shots actually put more stress on the weapon than letting it loose to fly its full distance, Lockheed told us.

breakingdefense.com

 

[bobbymike]

Raytheon exits precision strike missile competition

Raytheon is bowing out of the technical maturation phase of the U.S. Army's Precision Strike Missile competition after resolving technical issues.

www.defensenews.com

 

[Moose]

That's a damned shame, going to kneecap their ability to compete for the final contract. And even if they win, LM just got a gift-wrapped reason to complain to their congressional allies.

 

[sferrin]

That's a damned shame, going to kneecap their ability to compete for the final contract. And even if they win, LM just got a gift-wrapped reason to complain to their congressional allies.

Why would LM complain about Raytheon exiting the competition?

“Their period of performance ended on the 20th, last Friday, and so they dropped out of the competition because they didn’t meet the requirement for the next phase,” he said. “It has been a competitive program and all competitions end and this one ended in this way.”

 

[Josh_TN]

LM's tests have knocked it out of the park so far and their future testing apparently will include multiple missiles. It seems like a no brainer to go with the LM product and I can't imagine why anyone on any side would contest it.

 

[Moose]

That's a damned shame, going to kneecap their ability to compete for the final contract. And even if they win, LM just got a gift-wrapped reason to complain to their congressional allies.

Why would LM complain about Raytheon exiting the competition?

“Their period of performance ended on the 20th, last Friday, and so they dropped out of the competition because they didn’t meet the requirement for the next phase,” he said. “It has been a competitive program and all competitions end and this one ended in this way.”

Poor wording on my part. I meant that in the now-unlikely event of a Raytheon win, LockMart's got a simple but direct line of attack.

 

[sferrin]

That's a damned shame, going to kneecap their ability to compete for the final contract. And even if they win, LM just got a gift-wrapped reason to complain to their congressional allies.

Why would LM complain about Raytheon exiting the competition?

“Their period of performance ended on the 20th, last Friday, and so they dropped out of the competition because they didn’t meet the requirement for the next phase,” he said. “It has been a competitive program and all competitions end and this one ended in this way.”

Poor wording on my part. I meant that in the now-unlikely event of a Raytheon win, LockMart's got a simple but direct line of attack.

It sounded like Raytheon threw in the towel. How could they possibly win?

 

[Moose]

My understanding was that they'd still be part of the Milestone B review, but upon further reading today it looks like I'm wrong and they're totally out. Ah well.

 

[sferrin]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1243240405459664905

Raytheon exits precision strike missile competition

Raytheon is bowing out of the technical maturation phase of the U.S. Army's Precision Strike Missile competition after resolving technical issues.

www.defensenews.com

"And the service plans to extend the range of the PrSM missile so there are opportunities for competition there “and we would welcome Raytheon as an important competitor,” Rafferty said, adding Raytheon’s design features a compelling propulsion system, which fundamentally differs from Lockheed’s design and could be considered down the road. "

Hmmmm.

 

[bobbymike]

Army Trying to Mitigate Disruptions for Top Modernization Programs

Army Trying to Mitigate Disruptions for Top Modernization Programs

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

 

[bobbymike]

Pandemic not slowing Army plans to field enduring indirect fires protection capability

The Army conducted a virtual industry day to keep its program to field an indirect fires protection capability moving forward amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

www.defensenews.com

 

[bobbymike]

Army General: Emerging 70km-Range Artillery Cannons Bring New Attack Options

Brig. Gen. John Rafferty, Director, Long Range Precision Fires Cross Functional Team, Army Futures Command

defensemaven.io

 

[bobbymike]

Army Rebuilds Artillery Arm For Large-Scale War - Breaking Defense

The service’s new AimPoint plan builds very different forces for Europe and the Pacific – but new high-level artillery HQs are central to both.

breakingdefense.com

 

[bobbymike]

Army: Lockheed PrSM Missile Aces Third Flight Test - Breaking Defense

Next year will see the Precision Strike Missile tested at its maximum range of over 300 miles. The base model enters service in 2023, with range and targeting upgrades to follow.

breakingdefense.com

 

[AN/AWW-14(V)]

 

[bring_it_on]

Army: Lockheed PrSM Missile Aces Third Flight Test - Breaking Defense

Next year will see the Precision Strike Missile tested at its maximum range of over 300 miles. The base model enters service in 2023, with range and targeting upgrades to follow.

breakingdefense.com

Brig. Gen Rafferty has in the past mentioned a passive RF/ Anti Radiation seeker. This article mentions a multi-mode seeker. The Army has in the past considered a JAGM seeker on an ATACMS. I wonder what the target set is for a moving target PrSM and what seeker options are already mature for this weapon. At this rate they could probably spiral the seeker in around 2025.

 

[Mark S.]

Think they mentioned ships as part of the target set.

 

[jsport]

Army Rebuilds Artillery Arm For Large-Scale War - Breaking Defense

The service’s new AimPoint plan builds very different forces for Europe and the Pacific – but new high-level artillery HQs are central to both.

breakingdefense.com

"Theater Artillery Command and Corp Artillery Element" whoa . that is a new Army if it actually occurs. This will require persistent intent, big and persistent cash and big guns..where from in the resource constrained budget world?

 

[aonestudio]

Rafferty’s team is developing the Strategic Long-Range Cannon, a supergun using gunpowder to launch guided projectiles over one thousand miles. While a full-up SLRC prototype won’t be test-fired until 2023, two “test assets” are already launching simulated projectiles called slugs.

Army Tests New A2/AD Tools: Howitzers, Missiles & 1,000-Mile Supergun - Breaking Defense

This spring’s successful test shots of the Precision Strike Missile and Extended-Range Cannon are just two pieces of a rapidly evolving portfolio of new long-range weapons.

breakingdefense.com

 

[stealthflanker]

That super-gun is interesting. I'm curious if they will resort to Rocket or Ramjet projectiles or maybe some unusual solutions such as travelling charge.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Army Rebuilds Artillery Arm For Large-Scale War - Breaking Defense

The service’s new AimPoint plan builds very different forces for Europe and the Pacific – but new high-level artillery HQs are central to both.

breakingdefense.com

"Theater Artillery Command and Corp Artillery Element" whoa . that is a new Army if it actually occurs. This will require persistent intent, big and persistent cash and big guns..where from in the resource constrained budget world?

They might as well bring back the U.S. Army Coast Artillery Corps altogether.

 

[jsport]

Rafferty’s team is developing the Strategic Long-Range Cannon, a supergun using gunpowder to launch guided projectiles over one thousand miles. While a full-up SLRC prototype won’t be test-fired until 2023, two “test assets” are already launching simulated projectiles called slugs.

Army Tests New A2/AD Tools: Howitzers, Missiles & 1,000-Mile Supergun - Breaking Defense

This spring’s successful test shots of the Precision Strike Missile and Extended-Range Cannon are just two pieces of a rapidly evolving portfolio of new long-range weapons.

breakingdefense.com

W/O Strategic Long-Range Cannons high cost low density assets like long range hypersonic missiles will not survive and deliver against evolving air defenses.

 

[bring_it_on]

The Army has yet to present a formal acquisition plan for the LRHW 2.0 so we don't really have any insight into how and in what quantity it plans to employ it. OpFires with its large magazine and tactical flexibility is probably a better long term option. Perhaps a US Army and USMC OpFires based solution could be bought in quantity towards the second half of the 2020's.

That said, I'd much rather focus hypersonic acquisition investments towards the AF and Navy programs. The former needs both air-breathing and boost glide, while the latter needs to speed up VLS integration and perhaps look at integrating an AB hypersonic cruise missile on its strike fighter fleet. I would much rather this current upswing in defense budgets be used to bring that to fruition than to advance everything and put really nothing into a sustainable acquisition program going into the other side of the budget cycle. The Army LRHW etc is outside of its LRPF portfolio. PrSM, GMLRS-ER, Next Gen precision artillery rounds and the strategic fires cannon is probably a more important capability IMO. If they can bring all of these into operational service that would be a substantial achievement.

 

[AN/AWW-14(V)]

The Army has drafted an acquisition strategy calling for at least three additional opportunities for competition on the Precision Strike Missile, giving Raytheon -- which was bumped from the contest in March -- and other interested companies a chance to improve the base missile being developed by Lockheed Martin as a follow-on to the Army Tactical Missile.

Army eyes three future competitions to upgrade PrSM | InsideDefense.com

The Army has drafted an acquisition strategy calling for at least three additional opportunities for competition on the Precision Strike Missile, giving Raytheon -- which was bumped from the contest in March -- and other interested companies a chance to improve the base missile being developed...

insidedefense.com

 

[sferrin]

The Army has drafted an acquisition strategy calling for at least three additional opportunities for competition on the Precision Strike Missile, giving Raytheon -- which was bumped from the contest in March -- and other interested companies a chance to improve the base missile being developed by Lockheed Martin as a follow-on to the Army Tactical Missile.

Army eyes three future competitions to upgrade PrSM | InsideDefense.com

The Army has drafted an acquisition strategy calling for at least three additional opportunities for competition on the Precision Strike Missile, giving Raytheon -- which was bumped from the contest in March -- and other interested companies a chance to improve the base missile being developed...

insidedefense.com

This strikes me as just odd. Almost like, "hey Boeing, don't give up. If we decided we don't like the F-35 after 500 units we'll give you another chance to sell that X-32."

 

[TomS]

The Army has drafted an acquisition strategy calling for at least three additional opportunities for competition on the Precision Strike Missile, giving Raytheon -- which was bumped from the contest in March -- and other interested companies a chance to improve the base missile being developed by Lockheed Martin as a follow-on to the Army Tactical Missile.

Army eyes three future competitions to upgrade PrSM | InsideDefense.com

The Army has drafted an acquisition strategy calling for at least three additional opportunities for competition on the Precision Strike Missile, giving Raytheon -- which was bumped from the contest in March -- and other interested companies a chance to improve the base missile being developed...

insidedefense.com

This strikes me as just odd. Almost like, "hey Boeing, don't give up. If we decided we don't like the F-35 after 500 units we'll give you another chance to sell that X-32."

Or conversely, "hey Lockheed, don't get complacent just because you've won this round. You have to keep being creative or someone else will come with a better idea and take it away from you."

 

[Grey Havoc]

It is not exactly a ringing endorsement of Lockheed Martin, to be sure.

 

[bring_it_on]

Lockheed Martin is integrating technologies into the final product and making that weapon system. I believe they always wanted to spiral this into an open system where propulsion or guidance technologies could be competed in the future instead of it being locked into one OEM for decades. So whether that is competing a future propulsion stack, or seeker concepts etc there will be opportunities to transition capabilities presented by others into the system.

To Lockheed's part they have executed the program on schedule and have demonstrated 3 for 3 in terms of successful firings. Raytheon couldn't even get off the ground. However if someone has something that the program is interested in spiraling in then they want to keep the option open. Not that it would be easy but they will surely compete future capabilities into the system. Whether that results in wholesale transition to a different prime remains to be seen. I highly doubt it. Lockheed has a long track record with ATACMS and has done well on the PrSM. But the plan was always to allow opportunities for innovative proposals to enter into future upgrades so I won't take this as a reflection on Lockheed, Raytheon or whosoever else may be involved.

 

[bobbymike]

Army Tests PrSM Seeker To Hunt Ships & SAMs - Breaking Defense

The brand new missile seeker can home in on radio and radar, which means it can also target anti-aircraft defenses – blasting a path through them for US airpower.

breakingdefense.com

 

[bobbymike]

The Army's newest supergun will cost half a billion dollars before it's even ready for a fight

The Army's plan to build a fleet of Extended Ranger Cannon Artillery systems starting in fiscal year 2021 will cost the service at least a half billion dollars, according to a new assessment from the Government Accountability Office

taskandpurpose.com

 

[Grey Havoc]

Another trainwreck brewing ?

 

[Lc89]

The U.S. Army Is Using Satellites for Artillery Shell Targeting

Army howitzers and rocket launchers can use the power of space satellites to fire on targets far beyond line of sight.

www.popularmechanics.com

Army on path to use space sensors to help guns on the ground see farther

The service was able to link space sensors with shooters in live-fire demonstrations in Germany on three separate occasions.

www.c4isrnet.com

 

[bobbymike]

This could get interesting

Long-Range All-Domain Prompts Roles & Missions Debate - Breaking Defense

"It's ridiculous, to be quite candid. It is encroachment on roles and missions," says Mitchell Institute's Dave Deptula about Army plans for super long-range weapons that rival the capabilities of Air Force combat aircraft.

breakingdefense.com

 

[Grey Havoc]

Putting it mildly.

 

[jsport]

The AF could be expected to have this response. The problem is that aircraft just are not going to be as survivable as they were before. Also w/o a gun mounting aircraft to defeat hardened structures and point defenses, the aircraft delivered munitions will be intercepted by point defense systems.. Artillery is cheap, even super gun rds will be relatively cheap compared to aircraft and missiles. If DEAD is to be accomplished to allow both long range missiles and aircraft survive, then the super gun is the only way. Thank you Deptula for proving my point.

on another issue:
Brutus is fine. but, although probably expensive, the US Army should be looking at.

News Co. (ASX:NWS) Insider Ana Pessoa Sells 3,121 Shares

News Co. (ASX:NWS – Get Free Report) insider Ana Pessoa sold 3,121 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction on Tuesday, October 1st. The stock was sold at an average price of A$26.41 ($18.21), for a total transaction of A$82,425.61 ($56,845.25). News Stock Performance The company has a...

www.defenseworld.net