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

When opne party to an agreement routinely breaks that agreement, the already is, no agreement.

How long do you allow them to get away with that?

The situation of nuclear proliferation is alreay in progress when the NK regime routinely do whatever the hell they want without censure.
 
Does anyone know how many R-330Zh Zhitels Russia has deployed in Ukraine and how many have been destroyed by HIMARS units?
 
NMaude said:
So does this mean the LRIP phase is just about to start?
Click to expand...
Is the source of Biden's delay on ATACMS? It would make sense to not send over ATACMS until you actually have the replacing capability in hand.
 
zevets said:
Is the source of Biden's delay on ATACMS? It would make sense to not send over ATACMS until you actually have the replacing capability in hand.
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking, maybe when enough LRIP rounds have been manufactured and handed over to the US Army they'll start retiring ATACMS then sending them to Ukraine.
 
zevets said:
Is the source of Biden's delay on ATACMS? It would make sense to not send over ATACMS until you actually have the replacing capability in hand.
Click to expand...
This has definitely been mentioned, off the record, as a reason for holding off. But I wouldn't say it's the sole reason or that deliveries would be certain to start when LRPF production gets underway.
 
Assuming that once substantial numbers of LRIP LRPF rounds have been delivered resulting in ATACMS rounds being withdrawn from US inventory before being sent to Ukraine since the US has already begun supplying cluster-munition shells to Ukraine I won't be surprised if the ATACMS supplied include ones with the cluster-munitions warhead.
 
jsport said:
that is sh.. hot. thank you for posting.
Click to expand...
There's more about the TC-MLRS below. It's unclear whether this used the current 230mm diameter or the new wider 288mm design. But either way it moved the control section to the tail thus removing the frontal guide fins to reduce drag.

www.thedrive.com

Double The Range Rockets For HIMARS One Step Closer To Production

The Extended-Range Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System was test fired from a HIMARS launcher during its first systems qualification trial.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com
 
Forest Green said:
There's more about the TC-MLRS below. It's unclear whether this used the current 230mm diameter or the new wider 288mm design. But either way it moved the control section to the tail thus removing the frontal guide fins to reduce drag.

www.thedrive.com

Double The Range Rockets For HIMARS One Step Closer To Production

The Extended-Range Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System was test fired from a HIMARS launcher during its first systems qualification trial.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com
Click to expand...

I thought I heard somewhere that the ER version was an inch in diameter thicker (10 vs 9 of the old rockets)?
 
Josh_TN said:
I thought I heard somewhere that the ER version was an inch in diameter thicker (10 vs 9 of the old rockets)?
Click to expand...
I had 11.5 inch floating around in my head, but I don't know whether I was confusing it with the AARGM-ER for some reason. Turns out you are right, it's here in the small print.


Launch Pod Container: Updated design for ER GMLRS with the ability to accommodate future GMLRS variants up to 10" diameter.
Click to expand...
 
What are the odds that the US Army will get some LRPF missiles to Ukraine as soon as possible for combat-testing?
 
The decision not supply ATACMs seems more political rather than technical. We might still see it donated, but it likely would only be in response to some other escalation.
 
Now that the LRPF has entered the LRIP phase (No doubt the DoD has accelerated this phase given the military developments in Ukraine over the past year) as soon as enough of these LRIP rounds have been produced and accepted by the US Army the DoD won't have the excuse saying they don't have enough available to send ATACMS to Ukraine (I imagine they could send about one to two dozen MGM-140s which would be enough to get a baseline result to compare the LRPF against).

On another note what is the DoD tri-services designation for the PrSM?
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
Now that the LRPF has entered the LRIP phase (No doubt the DoD has accelerated this phase given the military developments in Ukraine over the past year) as soon as enough of these LRIP rounds have been produced and accepted by the US Army the DoD won't have the excuse saying they don't have enough available to send ATACMS to Ukraine (I imagine they could send about one to two dozen MGM-140s which would be enough to get a baseline result to compare the LRPF against).

On another note what is the DoD tri-services designation for the LRPF?
Click to expand...

Again, the decision not to provide those weapons was political and likely had little to do with inventory.

To the extent PrSMs production has been accelerated, it is so that it can be available in a conflict with China.

EDIT: as for PrSM testing in Ukraine, it seems even more unlikely than ATACMs. All weapons to date have been older versions or models, partially to clear inventory and likely in some cases to preserve the extent of US capability. I can’t imagine why the US would want its latest aeroballistic missile recovered by a close ally of the PRC.
 
Josh_TN said:
All weapons to date have been older versions or models, partially to clear inventory and likely in some cases to preserve the extent of US capability.
Click to expand...

I can see after a few dozen LRIP PrSM rounds have been produced and handed over to the US Army and an equal number of the oldest ATACMS rounds in stock (Maybe nearing the end of their shelf-life) being withdrawn and sent to Ukraine.
 
jsport said:
The strategy will also consider new technology to enhance conventional fires on the battlefield, such as advances in propellant that make it possible for midrange cannons to shoot as far as longer-range systems.

believe it when you see it.
Click to expand...

I think range extensions via propellant are unlikely, but the US is starting production of new base bleed and RAP shells that would extend range. In any case I think this conflict demonstrates that the most important feature a howitzer can have is faster target information. Shooting faster, ideally first, seems to be more important than absolute range. That probably is even more the case in a conflict with a more fluid FEBA than the current Ukrainian war.
 
Should be pointed out that the the standard L38 155mm guns have a 35km range with current propellant and shells. The m1299 can do 60km with current shells as well, those go up to nearly 45km to 70km using the newest shells.

And averages 4 shot in a minute in bursts and 1 per minute sustained while man loading. Which is bout max for an uncold gun if you want faster rate of fire you will need some type of active cooling.

Cause while the autoloaders like the Archer and PzH2000 are faster, they can only done 1 super fast burst every two minutes.

If they try to do faster both barrel wear and risk of bursting the barrel climbs exponentially.

They can sustain a 4 shot a minute just fine though thanks to their autoloaders.

While the reaction speed between a M109 and PZH2000 is similar.

Only way to increase that is shooting on the move.

Range is handy cause it allows you to have a thicker area of fires with the same amount of guns. Especially if you keep the gun numbers up allowing you to do nasty overlapping fields of fire.

Also handy in battle damage role, can spead the guns out more making them harder to hit, while also allowing other batteries to cover down on each other damages.
 
Josh_TN said:
EDIT: as for PrSM testing in Ukraine, it seems even more unlikely than ATACMs. All weapons to date have been older versions or models, partially to clear inventory and likely in some cases to preserve the extent of US capability. I can’t imagine why the US would want its latest aeroballistic missile recovered by a close ally of the PRC.
Click to expand...
The entire Ukraine War has been an excuse for everyone to hand over all their about-ready-to-expire rockets and missiles that they'd been planning on demilling and scrapping, and save all that $$ that would have been spent on demilling them. I mean, Germany was cleaning out all their leftover East Germany Army kit, like SA-7 (and cousins), so it was ~30 years old already!
 
Now that that the PrSM is in production what is its' US DoD tri-services designation?
 
isayyo2 said:
It was actually an AGS barrel mounted on a M107/M110 chassis.
Click to expand...
www.alamy.com

An Advanced Gun System Prototype, Extended Range Cannon Artillery and M110 Advanced Gun System are positioned to support Advanced Battle Management Systems (ABMS) Onramp 2 at White Sands Mission Range, New Mexico on Aug. 28, 2020. The effect ABMS is

Download this stock image: An Advanced Gun System Prototype, Extended Range Cannon Artillery and M110 Advanced Gun System are positioned to support Advanced Battle Management Systems (ABMS) Onramp 2 at White Sands Mission Range, New Mexico on Aug. 28, 2020. The effect ABMS is attempting to...
www.alamy.com www.alamy.com

Sure looks bigger than 155mm
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom