M270 MLRS and M142 HIMARS Developments

timmymagic said:
First sight of the French Thundart

https://twitter.com/x/status/1996489722449862897
View: https://x.com/MBDAFrance/status/1996489722449862897

https://twitter.com/x/status/1981276946811039874
View: https://x.com/MBDAFrance/status/1981276946811039874
Click to expand...

French Thundart Rocket Unveiled As Longer-Range Alternative To HIMARS​

www.twz.com

French Thundart Rocket Unveiled As Longer-Range Alternative To HIMARS

Due to be tested next year, the Thundart is one of two options for a new sovereign guided artillery rocket for the French Army. Due to be tested next year, the Thundart is one of two options for a new sovereign guided artillery rocket for the French Army.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 
I mean we all could have told them....

The Turgis & Gaillard proposal for France was seen with MFOM in the imagery...so they'll need some new CGI and design for that...

Germany, Netherlands and Denmark.....all fell for it (Denmark already regrets the purchase of PULS). I suspect this will also kill off the PULS proposal for Norway...leaving HiMARS as the only realistic choice (which given that Norway would be fighting with UK and USMC in a war was already in the lead).

If only Europe was a bit better organised and agreed on their own MFOM style canister and fire control integration they could have gone to the US and given them a take it or leave it offer....make MFOM open source or we walk....

https://twitter.com/x/status/1999138171775221836
View: https://x.com/ColbyBadhwar/status/1999138171775221836
 
timmymagic said:
I mean we all could have told them....

The Turgis & Gaillard proposal for France was seen with MFOM in the imagery...so they'll need some new CGI and design for that...

Germany, Netherlands and Denmark.....all fell for it (Denmark already regrets the purchase of PULS). I suspect this will also kill off the PULS proposal for Norway...leaving HiMARS as the only realistic choice (which given that Norway would be fighting with UK and USMC in a war was already in the lead).

If only Europe was a bit better organised and agreed on their own MFOM style canister and fire control integration they could have gone to the US and given them a take it or leave it offer....make MFOM open source or we walk....
Click to expand...
Why do you portray it as a clear cut choice? Yes, MFOM non-integration on PULS, K239/Homar, etc was predictable at least for now. Even then, it's definitely not a bad decision.

  1. M270/M142 buy is a double edged sword - You get access to mass produced MFOM, but good luck integrating your own munitions, or just anything you like that isn't MFOM. Your MRL is going to progress only where Lockheed wants it to.
    Open integration is basically what PULS offers.

  2. M142/M270 are not manufactured in sufficient quantity to rapidly supply every European customer. Inevitably competitors will get in. LM is losing a lot of money refusing to sell MFOM munitions to European nations that want them.

  3. MRL are not a massively used weapon. Mass production helps Ukraine with its specific circumstances, but it's not as important for the general Europe which might emphasize capability more than quantity.
 
timmymagic said:
I mean we all could have told them....
Click to expand...
I mean it was said all the time it was a maybe but would deppend on us allowance....
timmymagic said:
The Turgis & Gaillard proposal for France was seen with MFOM in the imagery...so they'll need some new CGI and design for that...

Germany, Netherlands and Denmark.....all fell for it (Denmark already regrets the purchase of PULS).
Click to expand...
Well atleast germany didn't really had an option at that point for an "quick" replacement.
timmymagic said:
I suspect this will also kill off the PULS proposal for Norway...leaving HiMARS as the only realistic choice (which given that Norway would be fighting with UK and USMC in a war was already in the lead).
Click to expand...
Wanst PULS already excluded from norway?
To if i remember it correctly the decision for the final wheeled MLRS wasn't done yet.
timmymagic said:
If only Europe was a bit better organised and agreed on their own MFOM style canister and fire control integration they could have gone to the US and given them a take it or leave it offer....make MFOM open source or we walk....

https://twitter.com/x/status/1999138171775221836
View: https://x.com/ColbyBadhwar/status/1999138171775221836
Click to expand...
The Goal for Puls is again a custom FCS so we can hope that a Mars 3 could have germany given more control over it.
Tho at this point all the development in europe would allow for a sole european development if they really wanted to make an european common MLRS but that still would take time.
 
Big_Zukini said:
M270/M142 buy is a double edged sword - You get access to mass produced MFOM, but good luck integrating your own munitions, or just anything you like that isn't MFOM. Your MRL is going to progress only where Lockheed wants it to.
Open integration is basically what PULS offers.
Click to expand...

That's the thing.....MLRS was a joint programme in the past. It started as GSRS and was a US/West Germany/France and UK joint programme. European countries built M270 and also made rockets, including their own specialist payloads (AT2). The UK also jointly funded GMLRS with the US...Europe has also made its own launch vehicles (LIMAWS(R)) and fire control (LRU/Mars/-I) in the past.

Restoring that Jointness would have benefits to all sides....if Europe had its s**t together they could have approached the US and given them a take it or leave it offer....make MFOM and Fire Control 'open source' or we build our own equivalent European system with our own payloads. The benefits to all sides of that arrangement are pretty obvious...

Big_Zukini said:
M142/M270 are not manufactured in sufficient quantity to rapidly supply every European customer. Inevitably competitors will get in. LM is losing a lot of money refusing to sell MFOM munitions to European nations that want them.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. We could have had M270A2, HIMARS, GMARS, LIMAWS(R) and Foudre covering all possible bases and in use with all NATO militaries....US would probably still make the bulk of the money with GMLRS, GMLRS-ER and PrSM. But adding in JFS-M, LPS, Thundart etc would make it an even more compelling system.

Big_Zukini said:
MRL are not a massively used weapon. Mass production helps Ukraine with its specific circumstances, but it's not as important for the general Europe which might emphasize capability more than quantity.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree with this. We've all seen the utility of GMLRS in Ukraine, and other MRL systems. But they were also the crucial, most successful, artillery system in Afghanistan, Iraq and GW1. That will only grow as they become launchers for other munitions, including SAM's.
 
timmymagic said:
That's the thing.....MLRS was a joint programme in the past. It started as GSRS and was a US/West Germany/France and UK joint programme. European countries built M270 and also made rockets, including their own specialist payloads (AT2). The UK also jointly funded GMLRS with the US...Europe has also made its own launch vehicles (LIMAWS(R)) and fire control (LRU/Mars/-I) in the past.

Restoring that Jointness would have benefits to all sides....if Europe had its s**t together they could have approached the US and given them a take it or leave it offer....make MFOM and Fire Control 'open source' or we build our own equivalent European system with our own payloads. The benefits to all sides of that arrangement are pretty obvious...



Absolutely. We could have had M270A2, HIMARS, GMARS, LIMAWS(R) and Foudre covering all possible bases and in use with all NATO militaries....US would probably still make the bulk of the money with GMLRS, GMLRS-ER and PrSM. But adding in JFS-M, LPS, Thundart etc would make it an even more compelling system.
Click to expand...
Absolutely nothing prevents LM from getting into EuroPULS. There seems to be European openness to this. Ball is in their court. And I'm optimistic about them eventually caving in.
It seems our disagreement is how they should have approached it BEFORE.

I also believe that since the US is putting obstacles, getting as many non-US systems into Europe inherently increases leverage to concede.
timmymagic said:
I'd disagree with this. We've all seen the utility of GMLRS in Ukraine, and other MRL systems. But they were also the crucial, most successful, artillery system in Afghanistan, Iraq and GW1. That will only grow as they become launchers for other munitions, including SAM's.
Click to expand...
MRL is dominant there because of a lack of airpower. They lack diversity in warhead size, type (especially penetration), angle of impact, and guidance.
And they are much more expensive in terms of $/kg.
So there is no reason to believe Ukrainian expenditure is indicative of European consumption.
 
timmymagic said:
Ukrainian consumption doesn't come close to how many M30 NATO militaries were planning to use in the 80's..
Click to expand...

I think that would have been M26 unguided rounds back then. But certainly NATO usage would be extreme. I have no idea how many systems were ultimately donated to Ukraine, but the initial donation of HIMARS was something like a light battalion. The U.S. Army has a dozen active battalions and a half dozen reserve, discounting the M270 and USMC (and the rest of NATO). The Poles are buying a ridiculous number of U.S. and Korean systems as part of their rearmament program.
 
timmymagic said:
Ukrainian consumption doesn't come close to how many M30 NATO militaries were planning to use in the 80's..
Click to expand...
What about 2030?
Josh_TN said:
I think that would have been M26 unguided rounds back then. But certainly NATO usage would be extreme. I have no idea how many systems were ultimately donated to Ukraine, but the initial donation of HIMARS was something like a light battalion. The U.S. Army has a dozen active battalions and a half dozen reserve, discounting the M270 and USMC (and the rest of NATO). The Poles are buying a ridiculous number of U.S. and Korean systems as part of their rearmament program.
Click to expand...
Poland is buying a lot of launchers. Not a lot of munitions. That's the big difference. You can choose to fire a lot from a single launcher, or you can choose to put launchers everywhere and fire fewer rounds from each. Poland's approach is the latter. Lots of territory to cover, hence the launchers. Hence also the significant AH-64E buy.
whatismoo said:
I can understand LockMart not trusting Israeli IP "protection." Everyone I know who works in the MIC hates working with the Israeli companies.
Click to expand...
There's a saying that we say to people who are lazy and won't do their job:
"Do your job".

Anyway:
1765579435572.png

1765579573924.png
 
whatismoo said:
Not sure what you mean by that? It wasn't that they refused, it's just that from what they said it was a hassle and cause a lot of headaches.
Click to expand...
Ok so how's that relevant?


EDIT:
PULS now has 5 European users (Denmark, Netherlands, Serbia, Germany, Greece).
K239 has 1 user albeit a major one (Poland).
There are still European nations that haven't decided what MRL they want, and may simply choose the one with the shortest lead time. Meaning if M270/M142 win another contract, their chances are lowered for the next one.
Denying MFOM to half of Europe out of spite is an untenable position.
 
Last edited:
Big_Zukini said:
Ok so how's that relevant?


EDIT:
PULS now has 5 European users (Denmark, Netherlands, Serbia, Germany, Greece).
K239 has 1 user albeit a major one (Poland).
There are still European nations that haven't decided what MRL they want, and may simply choose the one with the shortest lead time. Meaning if M270/M142 win another contract, their chances are lowered for the next one.
Denying MFOM to half of Europe out of spite is an untenable position.
Click to expand...
It's not out of spite for Lockheed to want to push GMARS over PULS and K239?
 
Big_Zukini said:
Ok so how's that relevant?


EDIT:
PULS now has 5 European users (Denmark, Netherlands, Serbia, Germany, Greece).
K239 has 1 user albeit a major one (Poland).
There are still European nations that haven't decided what MRL they want, and may simply choose the one with the shortest lead time. Meaning if M270/M142 win another contract, their chances are lowered for the next one.
Denying MFOM to half of Europe out of spite is an untenable position.
Click to expand...

Remember 2 of those PULS users regret their purchase now...
 
Big_Zukini said:
I know there's this story about Denmark allegedly ordering the wrong configuration and someone making a huge deal out of it.
Who's the 2nd one?
Click to expand...
Germany...they bought 5 systems...applied to use MFOM...LM and US said no.

Remember Germany are also buying GMARS...have MARS...and all their investments are in rocket production for MFOM (GMLRS, AT2 and JFS-M).

Those 5 systems will be quietly sold on in the next couple of years...
 
timmymagic said:
Germany...they bought 5 systems...applied to use MFOM...LM and US said no.

Remember Germany are also buying GMARS...have MARS...and all their investments are in rocket production for MFOM (GMLRS, AT2 and JFS-M).

Those 5 systems will be quietly sold on in the next couple of years...
Click to expand...
Maybe. Maybe not. None of this was unknown. None was shocked by this astonishing new revelation.
Germany is also home to the Boxer, yet buying CAVS and Piranhas.

Operating the systems concurrently is possible. One theory I heard is the PULS are going to be used as AShM launchers.
Some countries like Denmark are buying 3 very similar air defense system types just to get them in service faster. And that's a much more complex and expensive endeavor than mixing MRLs.

Poland is also very likely to resell its Abrams and K2 at some point, at least their older variants. Pursuant to a viable alternative that meets Polish demands for timelines, capabilities, and volume.
That's just how the defense market works. LM has its work cut out for it if it wants MFOM to dominate Europe. It's not going to come automatically while the competition is hard at work to prevent that.
 
timmymagic said:
Germany...they bought 5 systems...applied to use MFOM...LM and US said no.

Remember Germany are also buying GMARS...
Click to expand...
Thats not true / they havent decided what will be bought....
timmymagic said:
have MARS...
Click to expand...
*Mars 2 and there not without problems and while they could be still some Mars left (even tho there reused as spare parts for Mars 2) they don't seem to be able to retrofit them to Mars 2 standard while Mars 2 in itself is quite insufficient after years of ignoring growing obsolences.
timmymagic said:
and all their investments are in rocket production for MFOM (GMLRS, AT2 and JFS-M).
Click to expand...
Puls is physicaly compatible with MFOM pods so it wouldn't be hard to use AT2 and JFS-M on it tho AT2 would get a new rocket carrier anyway...
timmymagic said:
Those 5 systems will be quietly sold on in the next couple of years...
Click to expand...
Lets wait and see what the way ahead is because i doubt that.
 
Well it would appear the PLA is getting its' collective knickers in a twist over the possibility of Taiwan deploying ATACMS armed HIMARS units on its' western coast, from Defense Updates:


Chinese Defense Ministry spokesperson Jiang Bin stated that any strike conducted with U.S.-supplied ATACMS would invite an overwhelming counterstrike. Beijing has further warned that forces in Taiwan attempting to use American-provided missile systems for preemptive attacks against the mainland would face “annihilation.”​
Click to expand...
The remarks follow reports that Taiwan’s military is considering deploying its newly acquired ATACMS-capable HIMARS launchers to the outlying islands of Penghu and Dongyin. Beijing considers the self-governing island a breakaway province that must eventually be reunified with the mainland, and it has not ruled out the use of force to accomplish that goal. Taiwan’s democratically elected government firmly rejects this claim, a stance that aligns with the views of the vast majority of the island’s population.​
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes why China is alarmed by potential deployment of ATACMS-armed HIMARS on Taiwan’s coastline?#defenseupdates #himars #atacms
Click to expand...
Chapters:
0:00 TITLE
00:11 INTRODUCTION
01:11 SPONSORSHIP - NordVPN
01:45 ATACMS FOR TAIWAN
03:33 TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ATACMS
05:44 HIMARS LAUNCHERS IN TAIWAN's DEFENSIVE POSTURE
06:44 ANALYSIS
Click to expand...
 
Forest Green said:

French Thundart Rocket Unveiled As Longer-Range Alternative To HIMARS​

www.twz.com

French Thundart Rocket Unveiled As Longer-Range Alternative To HIMARS

Due to be tested next year, the Thundart is one of two options for a new sovereign guided artillery rocket for the French Army. Due to be tested next year, the Thundart is one of two options for a new sovereign guided artillery rocket for the French Army.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
The alternate FLP-T 150 program.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031294042726678859
View: https://x.com/ArianeGroup/status/2031294042726678859?s=20
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom