GMARS

More rockets truck just arrived

Corp spin
>Highly mobile, shoot and scoot capability
>Crew-of-2; Cabin capacity of 3
>Rapid emplacement with no out-riggers
>Boom & Hoist system enables safe and rapid reload in all weather conditions
>Only wheeled, 2-pod launcher system compatible with MLRS Family of Munitions
>Inertially navigated, GPS-aided Firepower against short- and long-ranges
>Component commonality with M270 / HIMARS and the HX Series of Mobility Platforms
>Interoperable with NATO forces, that use MLRS and HIMARS
>Designed with future in mind and flexibility to address multi-domain operations
>Rheinmetall's 8x8 truck combines the ability to self-cover long distances with logistical commonality to the HX family in service in the German Army, e.g. UTF, WLS
>Supports pre-planned and time-sensitive targeting

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why make it bigger if the launcher is the same?
    Better electronics? More futureproof platform?
    I thought the advantage of HIMARS lies in the fact that it's so compact and mobile?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it can launch twice as many missiles as HIMARS

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So it's basically MARS on wheels?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah. It's a wheeled M270, kinda surprised it took this long to come up with.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I don't think anyone expected just how much of a benefit the extra mobility of a wheeled vs tracked launcher would be. The entire Russian Armed Forces are completely unable to counter a missile launcher on a truck. They managed to take out an M270, still no HIMARS.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I think they managed to get one or two HIMARS but can't remember if they were destroyed outright or just busted up a bit. More luck than any kind of good management by Russia though

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              > n-no HIMARs was ever hit
              give it up, buddy. that meme died months ago, with secondary explosions and all.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                May I see it?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No, the he footage is classified top ultra zekret, Putin’s eyes only

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No, the he footage is classified top ultra zekret, Putin’s eyes only

                They did actually manage to hit a couple. Last video got posted here earlier this year. If it doesn't get posted again it's in tbharchvie somewhere.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Other way around. Russia always built wheeled MLRS since literally WW2. NATO for the longest time didn't bother with MLRS at all, and when it finally did, it went with tracks against all precedent for some convoluted tactical reasons.
              Eventually, NATO realised it was wrong, and went wheeled with HIMARS, GMARS and for those who import it from Israel, PULS.
              The big question is why Russian MLRS cannot do what NATO MLRS can even though it has literally half a century more experience with them.
              The answer is surprisingly simple: They're Russians
              (More seriously, Russian MLRS is either smol and lightweight and with insufficient range and firepower to have much of an impact, or so gargantuan that the advantages of going wheeled disappear again. NATO went with an in-between platform, and it works)
              tldr: Russians had the right idea, but it took Americans to make it work.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                To be fair, they did managed to frick up the principle behind the TOS-1 by making it on a tank chassis, very short ranged and massively explosive when hit
                That was platform I always figured an armoured truck would have done a better job at than some rattly old piece of shit tracked platform that uses lots of fuel and basically seems to have not a great deal of benefit to the crew or operations

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                > seems to have not a great deal of benefit to the crew or operations
                what do you mean? it has destroyed countless convoys. russian convoys, but still.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Its marginally better than hanging out with UR-77 Meteorit
                No one seems to want to escort him for some reason

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >and when it finally did, it went with tracks against all precedent for some convoluted tactical reasons.
                You're a fricking moron.
                >Russians had the right idea
                No they didn't, they just dumped their gun artillery for the sake of muh rocket wankery and ww2 we wuzzing.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >No they didn't, they just dumped their gun artillery
                >Russia
                >dumping tube artillery
                I'm afraid your home reality is over there, anon.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              its the other way around actually. no m270 losses and only 1 confirmed himars loss. pretty hilarious considering the russians claim to have destroyed more himars launchers than the ukies actually recieved.
              russians have also lost 2 smerch launchers, so its pretty funny considering they think theirs is better

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                we've seen a couple loaded onto planes and sent back for repairs, although only one looked hit, the other looked like somebody drove it into a ditch

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                oryx says theres 1 loss and 2 damaged. i think the 2 damaged are the ones you are talking about being loaded onto the planes. nothing about m270 on oryx either. either way the himars has been very good at mulching russians and generating endless seethe

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >surprised it took this long to come up with.
            Before 2020 they were still arguing over tracks vs wheels

            I don't think anyone expected just how much of a benefit the extra mobility of a wheeled vs tracked launcher would be. The entire Russian Armed Forces are completely unable to counter a missile launcher on a truck. They managed to take out an M270, still no HIMARS.

            >I don't think anyone expected just how much of a benefit the extra mobility
            It has been proven over and over on paper exercises since the Stryker programme. Unfortunately to many eyes in and out of the Army, they were viewed as a jeune ecole that could not be trusted.

            Furthermore most of Europe was full-on "end of history" until February 2022 so they didn't give a shit about the answer anyhow. That is why all these programmes are suddenly shooting through approval milestones lickety split, because the frickwits dragging their feet all the last 30 years suddenly want results yesterday. I remember when right up until Russia invaded, most of the world was snidely saying the Anglos are off their rocker, Russia would never dare, etc etc.

            Fricking homosexuals.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Cold War planning is why the M270 is an armored tracked vehicle
            then post Cold War budgeting and priorities meant replacing it just wasn't a priority

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        wouldnt it be better to just use 2x himars then? it would also allow you to split up your vehicles and if one gets hit you are still 50% operational

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          In some ways you can do more with two vehicles on the road to hit separate targets a long way away from each truck, but in terms of how much it costs to send say 12 rockets downrange the single vehicle is cheaper as you only need 2 crew with not a much larger cost of the truck with two launchers.
          Sort of think of it as maybe a generational upgrade
          You get a lot better electronics and systems, twice the capacity and a quicker setup time as you don't need outriggers out before firing. Literally pull up, shit rockets all over someone's life and keep driving a minute later, that's sort of why the HIMARS trucks are such a massive pain in the dick for Russia to counter. They turn up, fiddle around for a couple of minutes, launch and gone before even something like their A-50's even picks up the launches to figure out what's on the way and to where they're going to land.

          When there's a lot more PrSM out in circulation they don't need to wander as far to hit multiple targets either, so if there's anything in 3-400km of a launcher it can be shit upon from a great height very rapidly

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's basically an inbetween of M270 and HIMARS

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's an M270 on wheels, it's twice a HIMARS

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it has two pods like the M270 whereas the HIMAS has one pod
      2 pods means 12 missiles not 6 missiles
      and it is a common logisitical truck making operation and maintenance easy through economy of scale

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      because German marketers can make more money when they get destroyed

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        forgot to add break down or get damaged from using cheap materials and mohammed as workforce

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Wheeled M270 MLRS

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This is an escalation.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A line of red, one might say

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You forgot the crucial information:
    >Wheels 8

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Underrated post

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >"Gee GMARS, how come the MIC lets you have two GMLRS pods?"

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No thanks. I will stick with Chunmoo.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You will stick Chunmoo up your ass

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >homosexual fantasy

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You cant just slap a MARS-sticker on a rocket launcher and call it a day

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The problem is that the EU lacks ammo for things like this. We need to ramp shit up

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think the US is starting to churn out the next gen stuff, Australia's will start production next year as well to start bumping them out as well
      Would have thought Lockheed would do more partnerships with Rheinmetall (like they did with this vehicle) and they've got a new munition plant starting up in Unterlub thats doing artillery shells

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Unterlüß, not Unterlub. Its pronounced Underluss

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      As if having to rely on Korean shit wasn't humiliation enough, European countries have started to source shells directly from Chinese contractors. And they expect to have enough to fight Russia?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >chinese
        I wonder what that ST in ST engineering stands for?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Small Tingaling

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    many various platforms are going to start seeing competition. good thing because asiatic shit will become super cheap.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Rather put it on a MAN truck

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it is a MAN truck. Rheinmetall bought and rebranded MAN.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not exactly, Rheinmetall and MAN created RMMV as a joint venture, with a 51/49 split.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Is Europe giving rockets to Ukraine and how fast are they building them? Seems like major problem if US pulls support again is rocket supply

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Far as I can tell, the missiles only get made in the US and will soon to be Australia (GMLRS, PrSM and ATACMS)
      The US pulls aid, they won't magically appear on planes like they do now, however, they could still buy them with the old hard cash using their other sources of aid money. NATO is giving them 50bil a year every year as support until this is over. So its not an inconsiderable sum once you figure in the other aid packages from independent countries

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Europe does not build any MLRS compatible rockets, Germany has a license for unguided ones since the 80s but isn't making them anymore

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why do modern missile systems even need a turret anyways? Couldn't you make a far more mechanically simple system, (which also means more missiles carried), that's basically just a container full of missiles pointing straight up, which then just adjust course after launching? Seems like both vatnik and NATO weapons still have turreted missile launchers when vertical launch systems have been around for ages now, haven't they? Or is it some quirk of the missiles themselves needing to have a decent bearing to identify where they're going?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >we're going to make a more mechanically simple system by taking out the large simple parts on one component and adding small parts to a lot of components.
      It's mostly historical inertia from the unguided rocket era; but don't take that to mean there's any significant benefit in a land VLS.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They need to be that long to store the boosters, which is what is giving these rockets their long range.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      VLS are harder to load than the turret I think, and having more ammo just means you blow up bigger when hit

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Height. GMLRS missiles are a hair under 4 meters long, The M142 is already 3 meters tall, and a portion of that height is the chassis. It stands to reason if you mounted GMLRS vertically it would be very tall, to the point you might not be able to clear some bridges. Not to mention you probably couldn't fit it in a C-130, which is half of what HIMARS was created to do.

      VLS are harder to load than the turret I think, and having more ammo just means you blow up bigger when hit

      I don't think that's the issue, you could probably still make interchangeable pods that slide out the back like GMLRS, they'd just launch vertically.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        People underestimate just how deep VLS pods are given the size of the missiles they need to carry. Look up the Typhon and how ridiculously long it is just to hold Tomahawks and Standard Missiles.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Also seems like there will be surface launched JASSM for HIMARS, M270 and GMARS?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yep, the JASSM will get its own little container. Now that the US dropped the treaty on this sort of stuff I'd expect a lot to start coming out of the woodwork

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Surface-Launch Cruise Missile
      Good lord, the vatnik seethe when HIMARS start shooting GL-JASSMs will be insane

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The PrSM is also quite the nasty surprise with some enhanced accuracy and range. Word is Thales-AU and Lockheed are working on some air-breathing missiles too for this platform which could promise all sorts of high speed misery, given the failure of most of the Russian SAM systems to have much success on regular GMLRS or ATACMS it'll be nigh unstoppable

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What's the appeal of the 122mm rockets? Pretending you're a Grad?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Cheap unguided rockets for surface targets up to 40km away, also good for remote mining or cluster warheads. The launcher is way better than grad btw, easier to aim, smaller crew, easier to maintain, faster to reload

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >have a bunch of NATO countries that still use Grads
        >hey guys here is this new vehicle that not only fire our missile, but you can still use your stockpiles of 122mm

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        knife fighting and otherwise self defense

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I didn't know there was a 122mm MLRS pod. Interesting.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        worst Korea wanted to match volume that grads provide - same reason why poles got few hundred himars and few hundred Chunmoo

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >JASSM for HIMARS, M270 and GMARS
      Cheese on crackers why do the military love acronyms so much? Give it a proper name like before, you know, Sidewinder, Sparrow, Sherman etc.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    if GMARS doesn't stand for German HIMARS I will be sad

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    8 WHEELS¡¡¡¡
    How can russia compete now.

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Didnt rocketman die of aids?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *