Vought JTACMS/ATACMS (MGM-140)

MoD Russia claim shot down six U.S.-made MGM-140 ATACMS operational-tactical missiles.
mgm-140.JPG
t.me

MoD Russia

⚡️ Russian Defence Ministry report on the progress of the special military operation (17 April 2024) Part II (see Part I) ▫️Operational-Tactical Aviation, Missile Troops and Artillery of the Russian Groups of Forces have engaged ammunition depots of the Donetsk Operational-Tactical Group...
t.me t.me
t.me

Минобороны России

⚡️ Сводка Министерства обороны Российской Федерации о ходе проведения специальной военной операции (по состоянию на 17 апреля 2024 г.) Часть 2 (см. часть 1) ▫️ Оперативно-тактической авиацией, ракетными войсками и артиллерией группировок войск Вооруженных Сил Российской Федерации уничтожены...
t.me t.me
 
I'll believe the Russians claim about these shot down MGM-140sif the they publish photographs the missiles wreckage.
 
Last edited:
I would not read to much into any one engagement regarding the capability of specific weapons, even if the data coming from either side were consistently accurate.
 
timmymagic said:
Hang on...wasn't S-400 supposed to be far superior to Patriot??

It's almost like decades of combat use, multi billion investment and development and sustained, realistic testing actually count for something...

You'll be telling me next that the fact that more Amraam have been fired in tests than AA-12/R-77 have been built might actually count for something...
Click to expand...
Based on this it's questionable whether it's even within 3 decades of US air defence. I mean PAC-1s were intercepting Scuds travelling faster than ATACMS back in 1991.

NMaude said:
I'll believe the Russians claim about these shot down MGM-140s the they publish photographs the missiles wreckage.
Click to expand...
Given the photo in aonestudio's post, I'd say the issue is already put to bed.
 
I've seen too much hyperbole. This conflict for me and many others has turned personal. As a result any data is being frequently used as a cudgel to prove who's MIC and weapons suck and who is the ultimate. Those praising the "turkey shoot" with Iran should remember they were prepared way ahead of time with Iran giving a long heads up and a multinational effort went underway to protect Israel. Russia is not given a heads up and Ukraine is essentially given our vast intelligence apparatus to find weak spots and laziness in Russias AD systems as well as cruise and ballistic missiles much more advanced than what Iran has.

So comments along the lines of "s400 was lauded as best ever but now it SUCKS" are just silly.
 
"Based on this it's questionable whether it's even within 3 decades of US air defence. I mean PAC-1s were intercepting Scuds travelling faster than ATACMS back in 1991."

...come on now
 
That's definitely one of the cluster-munitions variants, I wonder if that was the missile that trashed an SA-21 Growler battery?
 
sferrin said:

We can see that. ;) What was it?
Click to expand...

sferrin said:
ATACMS maneuvers. SCUDs don't.
Click to expand...

Army TACMS isn't an anime character. It isn't going to pirouette around missiles flying towards it. It is not shocking that a S-300PM2 battery is being bullied by the equivalent of a battery's worth of ATACMS either, and that it got half of the missiles is quite good for a PAC-1/-2 contemporary system, clearly.

MGM-140 is quasi-ballistic only to confound WLRs. All maneuvering occurs within the initial launch and pitch up to flatten the trajectory. Army TACMS does not have terminal maneuvering in any sense of the word, its fins are fixed, and all maneuvering is done at extremely low G's. Only highly modern missiles like Iskander, Kh-80, and possibly LRASM and PrSM, incorporate such features.

S-300PM2, despite being a decade older, seems broadly comparable to PAC-3.
 
Last edited:
sferrin said:
There are several versions:



Click to expand...
I guess only the 160km version was supplied until now.

www.yahoo.com

Ukraine uses long-range missiles secretly provided by US to hit Russian-held areas, officials say

Ukraine for the first time has begun using long-range ballistic missiles provided secretly by the United States, bombing a Russian military airfield in Crimea last week and Russian forces in another occupied area overnight, American officials said Wednesday. Long sought by Ukrainian leaders...
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com

Long sought by Ukrainian leaders, the new missiles give Ukraine nearly double the striking distance — up to 300 kilometers (190 miles) — that it had with the mid-range version of the weapon that it received from the U.S. last October.
Click to expand...
The mid-range missiles provided last year, and some of the long-range ones sent more recently, carry cluster munitions that open in the air when fired, releasing hundreds of bomblets rather than a single warhead. Others sent recently have a single warhead.
Click to expand...
 
Seems they were funded through the $300 million "small package" of February. 200 times less money than last week package, but smart choice of weapons.
 
If Ukraine is now starting to get the long-range MGM-140 variant does that mean the US Army has started to replace its ATACMS with LRIP phase PsSMs?
 
NMaude said:
Any estimates based on similar previous missile programmes?
Click to expand...

I think deliveries go up to around 200-250 pretty steadily starting in 2026, based on a chart someone else posted somewhere. I think like a hundred in 2025. Not sure what has been delivered to date.
 
Josh_TN said:
Not sure what has been delivered to date.
Click to expand...

So maybe 50-100? I imagine with what has been happening in Ukraine with Ukraine's urgent need for more ATACMS rounds that the US Army would be pushing to accelerate the production as high as feasible.
 
NMaude said:
So maybe 50-100? I imagine with what has been happening in Ukraine with Ukraine's urgent need for more ATACMS rounds that the US Army would be pushing to accelerate the production as high as feasible.
Click to expand...

US supplies of ATACMs to Ukraine have more to do with politics than inventory; I would not read into it that much. The cluster versions of the weapon I think were technically withdrawn from service, much like the 155mm DPICM ammunition. They just were never thrown away.
 
Josh_TN said:
US supplies of ATACMs to Ukraine have more to do with politics than inventory
Click to expand...

It would appear that the Ukrainians will be getting the longer range ATACMS soon along with 500Lb unitary warheads.

Josh_TN said:
The cluster versions of the weapon I think were technically withdrawn from service, much like the 155mm DPICM ammunition. They just were never thrown away.
Click to expand...

One thing that's for sure and that's by the time Russo-Ukrainian war is over the US DoD won't have to spend a cent de-milling these particular munitions.
 
Josh_TN said:
US supplies of ATACMs to Ukraine have more to do with politics than inventory; I would not read into it that much. The cluster versions of the weapon I think were technically withdrawn from service, much like the 155mm DPICM ammunition. They just were never thrown away.
Click to expand...
"Had not yet had money allocated for demilitarization"

Demilling solid rocket motors is fun, you run a length of detcord up the center of the flame channel and ignite more or less the entire fuel grain at once. Big badaboom.
 
Forest Green said:
I think it's a mistake to replace ATACMS completely, the bigger warhead and cluster munitions capability has its uses, as proven in this war.
Click to expand...

They are not leaving inventory completely, but I think a lot of them are at their sell by date. Additionally the U.S. has stopped using cluster munitions, though it has not disposed of them.
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
They are not leaving inventory completely, but I think a lot of them are at their sell by date. Additionally the U.S. has stopped using cluster munitions, though it has not disposed of them.
Click to expand...
That's a mistake. Cluster munitions have proved highly effective at holding frontline enemy air bases at risk, particularly those hosting helicopters. Sure you could hit each helicopter with a PrSM but that isn't as cost effective.
 
One suspects that with the shifting political winds, the remaining anti-CM and anti-land mine proponents in the DOD and Armed Forces will be increasingly finding themselves irrelevant, if not outright unemployed.
 
I think there was an executive order to the effect that the U.S. would not use cluster munitions. I think this was revised under Trump to allow cluster munitions with a dud raye of less than 1%, although I do not think any US weapons in storage meet that standard.

Were the U.S. to be in a drawn out peer war I’m sure those weapons would be made available.
 
Josh_TN said:
I think there was an executive order to the effect that the U.S. would not use cluster munitions. I think this was revised under Trump to allow cluster munitions with a dud raye of less than 1%, although I do not think any US weapons in storage meet that standard.

Were the U.S. to be in a drawn out peer war I’m sure those weapons would be made available.
Click to expand...

Not quite.

The 2008 policy said that only weapons with a dud rate of less than 1% can be used, with no provision for a waiver. The 2017 policy revision states that existing inventory weapons with dud rates in excess of 1% can be used at the COCOM's discretion but no new weapons will be manufactured unless the dud rate can be gotten below 1%.
 
Forest Green said:
That's a mistake. Cluster munitions have proved highly effective at holding frontline enemy air bases at risk, particularly those hosting helicopters. Sure you could hit each helicopter with a PrSM but that isn't as cost effective.
Click to expand...

Look at what the GMLRS Alternative Warhead accomplishes with essentially pre-fragmented HE. Most of the same effect as a cluster weapon with no UXO problem when you're done.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom