Best in class in regards to rocket artillery. It’s funny how the US now has the gold standard in rocket artillery, when Russia used to be known for it.
Best in class in regards to rocket artillery.
Best in class in regards to rocket artillery. It’s funny how the US now has the gold standard in rocket artillery, when Russia used to be known for it.
What's with the blue rocket pod?
cyanide
Stun rocket.
Training rocket
Nooooooks
bio weapon
If the 5 green rockets hit their target, the blue one does crit damage
Mint flavored
This is the one that made me chuckle.
t. chuckler
deals ice damage
Crocket
Hold Up
>one video of one rocket is evidence of China's entire force
Just like all of the T-14s and Su-57s I guess
kek GMLRS mogs it
*doesn’t see widespread success in modern combat*
Azerbaijan literally used the Belorusian Polonez to strike Armenian infraestructure back in 2020: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYllgbYGefw&t=235s
And that MRL uses chink GMLRS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonez_(multiple_rocket_launcher)
That’s not impressive when you compare it to the work of HIMARS in Ukraine
All HIMARS has done was to strike static ammo depots. How is that more impressive than hitting static targets in the desert?
>the work of HIMARS in Ukraine
there is not one video showing a himars strike on anything of value
>but X said
>Engages you further than your standoff distance
>Your logistics centers blow up
>Refuses to elaborate
>Scoots
Yeah, Melitopol's airbase just up and furiously detonated itself, in two separate volleys hours apart, well behind enemy lines.
GMLRS has way more experience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weishi_Rockets#Operators
You posted info about a bunch of third world countries buying the cheapest thing they could find. I’m talking about experience. The GMLRS has been used to great effect in afghanistan, iraq, syria, and most notably, Ukraine.
And the chink GMLRS has been used to great effect by the Azeris in Nagorno Karabakh (Polonez, TRG-300) and Turkey in Syria (TRG-300). And both of those systems have also superior range than the HIMARS GMLRS (80km) vs TRG-300 (120km) & Polonex (290km)
Superior range at the cost of bigger rockets, less accuracy, and launchers the size of Mobile ICBMs. Besides PRSM is fired from HIMARS and outranges all of those. GMLRS is far superior and it’s why it’s mass produced while the Chinese variant is not
>Superior range at the cost of bigger rockets, less accuracy
COPE:
>we can hit a predetermined location and film different sequences of firing
>this is just as impressive as hitting our mock carrier that travels on a known track
>ignore the fact that the GMLRS has shown to be accurate in combat against the number 2 military in the world
That isn’t impressive at all
>number 2 military in the world
Anon, they're only the number 2 military in Ukraine.
This is cope. They are the most powerful conventional military that guided rocket artillery has faced. Only GMLRS has excelled in terms of rocket artillery
>HIMARS GMLRS
>Hit static depots from the designated GPS coordinates -> "BEST WEAPON EVER"
>Chink GMLRS
>Hit static targets from the designated GPS coordinates -> "That's not impressive, those are just static targets..."
Yea well one is happening in combat against an enemy that has some air defense and achieving first round hits, and the other is a cherry picked video from a non well respected communist government that didn’t upload their misses. There’s a reason GMLRS is considered the top guided rocket in the world. Cope however you must
People respect China. Sure, they dont have a GMLRS equivalent that compares but they have a massive navy
>People respect China
go home zhang
Pigdog
>People respect China.
Just stop. This is really embarrassing.
>People respect China.
>respect
Literally no one *respects* your cha bu duo, shiny-turd shithole, chang.
this thread has convinced me the china is not pathetic, but very modern and strong
So why do you feel the need to cope about untested Chink MLRS in a thread about the US and Russia? Go invade Afghanistan and lose like a real Great Power. You can't claim to be a superpower without losing to Afghans, it's like a rite of passage.
>untested Chink MLRS
Wrong:
GMLRS has 135km range and PRSM has over 500km
https://insidedefense.com/insider/extended-range-gmlrs-flies-135-km-final-engineering-development-test
If they are so good why hasn’t a single professional army adopted them?
They will. It takes time. No one is going to want GMLRS after the shitshow in Ukraine
They're only using HIMARS because their own BM-30 Smerch got wiped out by russian cruise missile strikes at the start of the invasion. The Smerch is actually capable of launching 9M544 and 9M549 guided rockets that have a range of 120 km and a circular error probable (CEP) of 5–10 m
>They're only using HIMARS because their own BM-30 Smerch got wiped out by russian cruise missile strikes at the start of the invasion.
Source?
> The Smerch is actually capable of launching 9M544 and 9M549 guided rockets that have a range of 120 km and a circular error probable (CEP) of 5–10 m
But those models aren’t combat tested or in mass production. This is furious cope because the the GMLRS is performing well and the smerch isn’t
>have a range of 120 km and a circular error probable (CEP) of 5–10 m
>miss a completely immobile factory complex and hit a shopping mall 500m away
Azerbaijan literally kicked the ass of the Armenian "professional" military back in 2020. Everyone were rooting for the armenians because their military was "professional" and full of veterans for the 90's war, yet they got their asses kicked by Azerbaijan's TB-2's guiding both loitering munitions (IAI Harop and Harpy) and GMLRS (launched from Polonez and TRG-300)
That isn’t impressive at all when you compare it to the Ukrainians using actual GMLRS to destroy multiple russian supply depots
So Azeris destroying the entirety of Armenias IADS (Radar installations and SAM sites) and HQs from 120km-290km away is less impressive than Ukranians destroying Russian ammo depots from 80km away?
>So Azeris destroying the entirety of Armenias IADS (Radar installations and SAM sites) and HQs from 120km-290km away
Source? Source everything down to them taking out IADS from their respective max ranges
My uncle is in the unit that conducted the strikes. Cope harder mutt
>I don't have any evidence so I'll just lie
Hahahahahahahaha homosexual!
Now post what happens when the enemy doesn't conveniently draw huge white circles around their equipment to make targets that can't be missed in open desert.
Lmao this was really pathetic
>You fool, you underestimate my power!
Not unusual. American equipment is usually the best in the world at 10x the price. Russia rocket artillery is literally a 60's era 5 ton truck with a WWII rocket system. That is why they can throw waves of that shit into the war and ngaf.
That’s true of almost all western equipment though. Even ‘cheap’ shit from Korea is still loads better than Chinese and Russian shit in most cases while also costing more. You get what you pay for.
Women in uniform make my peepee tingle.
What exactly makes the M142 better than the M270?
Faster and more mobile. The ‘270 can throw more spam though. They both use the same pods. Which is of course pretty fricking useful when it comes to updating them and keeping lots of ammo around for them. Captcha is NX0SOY. I wanted to share that.
it has wheels instead of treads. the M270 is based on the bradley chassis
Why are wheels better than Bradley?
off the top of my head, faster and less maintenance (maybe? feels like a truck is easier to maintain than a Bradley)
HIMARS was initially developed as a way to get MLRS into a C-130. So, it had to be under 20 tons, which pretty much meant a wheeled truck.
Wheeled trucks also tend to be cheaper to buy, cheaper to operate/maintain, faster on roads, more fuel-efficient, etc. The downside is that while they may be significantly lighter, that weight is concentrated over a vastly smaller set of footprints, so they have a much higher ground pressure, which is bad in soft terrain.
tl;dr Wheels are cheaper and lighter, but have trouble in certain types of terrain that treads can handle just fine.
>Wheeled trucks also tend to be cheaper to buy
That's why the M270 costs $5 million and the HiMARS $10 million.
imagine thinking you can buy a new in box m270 for it's 20 year old price
>imagine thinking you can buy a new in box m270 for it's 20 year old price
also, HIMARS is more connected with the latest datalinks and can fire more modern missiles, that's why M270 is being upgraded to match HIMARS
>Russia used to be known for it
perhaps because US intel analysts were keeping quiet about what they truly know about weapon capabilities, and in fact still do
the mistake WE made as uninformed observers is that we assumed Russian equipment was better than advertised because that's what NATO did; when in reality Russia kit turned out to be shittier because they're lying corrupt fricks
>picrel; Russian anti-carrier missile CEP
Well, picrel is to be expected when you try to fricking MadMax an anti-ship missile into a land attack role on the fly.
Mediocre ass on the girl in the front
Honestly, it's not the rocket; it's the GPS/INS guidance that makes it special, and the US is putting those in all kinds of munitions (first JDAM, then GMLRS, then Excalibur, then PGK and PGMM). That's the part that actually changes the equation. US rocket motors aren't significantly better-performing than Russian ones.
Its no surprise since the USA has shifted from tanks to rockets in the last 10 years. US marines have nasty amounts of rocket arty.
Chink shill gave up pretty easily. That speaks volumes to the superiority of the GMLRS