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.
 
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.
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.
 
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.
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.
 
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.
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.
 
Russian cluster munition use:
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.
1719339139426.png

Russian AP mine use:
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.
 
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.
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
 
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.
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.

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.
It is a Himars with another set of wheels.

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?
 
Russia claims to have destroyed M270 MLRS, which changed shape during a video cut.

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).
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom