Why do you need a specialized 3 million dollar launch vehicle for these rockets (or even worse, an M270)? Couldn't you just attach one or two rocket tubes on a trailer you pull around with a pickup truck, a van, or just an ordinary logistics truck? The cost would probably be twenty times smaller and you would be presenting a much smaller and lower value target to the enemy.
>The cost would probably be twenty times smaller
that's a problem. do you understand how the world works?
The car isn't what costs that much, moron. It's the equipment on it.
What equipment is on that truck which makes it necessary? Rockets are guided by satellite; why not have single use rocket tubes strapped to anything that will hold one?
>t. i don't understand how arty cc works and how it is integrated into operation level systems
ya I feel like a IMTV isnt that expensive lol like do these ppl do any research look at the cost of whatever compared to IMTV thats not where the money is going. its the FCS and all that shit
What fire control is there to do? Point the rocket at the right direction, give it the coordinates and the rocket handles the rest. You could achieve this "FCS" operation by just looking at a damn compass with your MK1 eyeball.
Dunning Kruger response.
You still don't fricking get it, do you? We don't give a shit how much something costs. The point is that it fricking kills what we shoot it at. We can afford to launch $100,000 rockets at a fricking mud hut just to kill a couple of durkas holding a ratty-ass AK. You think we give a shit about the cost of killing Russians?
The rockets would be equally as effective, it's just that there would be even more of them since more resources could be spent on rocket production instead of launch vehicle production.
Oh yeah? well smartass what do you think would be so very expensive on a welded steel trailer resembling an ordinary civilian four wheeler just with a missile tube or two in the middle? Imagine pic related but instead of a boat it's hauling some missiles. These missiles are really light weight as well at 300kg so a handcrank mechanism to erect them would only take like a single minute to deploy them, no need for complicated hydraulics. We all know that the pickup truck part doesn't cost a lot, in fact they could even be free confiscated vehicles from civilians.
OOOH, so you're just pretending to be moronic? Sorry bro, I actually mistook you for something else.
If MIC, LLC sells the cheap model, the untermensch might just make their own in the hut shop. MIC, LLC then goes bankrupt.
Some day after this war is over and Russia gets balkanized I would like to buy the truck that a HIMARS system was previously on and go on a grand tour around Europe
there won't be a Europe after this war
this, 2 more week and no Europe nato stoopid gays haha get Z'ed
Awesome idea. A gallon per mile is no sweat, right?
Unimog campers are a thing bro, you don't have to wait
>reddit frog
>pic related
>~50 litres per 100km
>1.5-2 euros per litre is now average price for gasoline
NEITHER GRETA THUNBERG NOR YOUR WALLET WILL ENJOY THIS ONE
Those are Lockheed Martin's proprietary missiles.
They won't work with other platforms unless Lockheed Martin license the use of their software and systems.
This isn't a BM-21. It's nice when the truck carries all the equipment the crew needs to see what they're going to blow up, plan how to do it, see where their own guys are, and be able to talk to them. Also the cab is armored and mine resistant so maybe the crew won't fricking die the moment an enemy happens to fart in their direction.
With GPS guides rockets it's as simple as the crew gets radio'd to fire a rocket at given coordinates, they drop whatever else that they were doing, plug them into the rocket through some console, a laptop for example, and then just launch and evacuate the launch site to look for a new rocket, there's not very much "equipment" required. They don't need to look for targets, they don't have to guide the rocket, all they do is shoot, scoot, and reload.
>why do you need specialised platforms to handle aiming, fire control, recoil management and reloading
>just strap tubes to a hilux
Vatnik tier logic, this is why russian MLRS can't hit shit
>aiming
Doesn't need to be the job of sone shmucks out in the field when wireless coms are a thing
>fire control
Elevate the rocket, stand back a bit, and launch. Not very difficult.
>recoil management
Dude it's a rocket not a cannon
>reloading
The reloading vehicle has a crane
If the Ruskies were technologically competent enough to field and use this sort of a system they would have won already.
To be fair the brits did it with commercial van hellfire's (Brimstone) lmao
you mean that? Anti vatnik truck?
An F-250 could haul one missile without any other equipment. You need big trucks to be able to haul them with appropriate gear safely.
>Why do you need a specialized 3 million dollar launch vehicle for these rockets
Targeting systems, loading mechanisms and reliability
HIMARS can acquire a target faster than the equivalent Russian system, Hit with higher precision, Get away faster because of the faster acquisition time preventing counter battery fire, not break down while relocating, use the built in mechanisms to reload much faster than the equivalent system and go back to strike again.
A large chunk of the price is that the MIC understands the value this has in increased capacity, and the US Army understands that the savings this provides vs the cost of lost soldiers if they where to buy less capable systems.
The US is not running up the draft, that means that the army are volunteers paid to risk their lives - Every life lost where it doesn't need to be is seen by the public and reduces the number of capable recruits that they will have apply by 5-10x the impact of a single lost soldier
Wars have a cost - There is no dancing around the fact victory is bought by Blood and Money together, If you want to avoid spending more of 1 You must spend a huge ANSTWKamount of the other
Why would the launch platform be doing the target acquiring when intel is what spots the target and relays the info back to fire management? No, the Himars get firing solutions and fire at those, they're not the ones looking at a drone video of a Russian ammo dump.
>You must spend a huge ANSTWKamount of the other
moron detected. the captcha goes in the field labelled "TYPE THE CAPTCHA HERE"
3 million for an extremely capable, rapidly mobile, easy to maintain rocket artillery system is pretty fricking cheap in terms of military equipment. A smaller system wouldn't give you the range, payload, or be able to hold the electronics needed to make it as accurate as it is. What you're talking about would probably be some kind of wheeled mortar system with a drone spotter. Also as a general rule, all artillery and indirect support weapons are universally considered high value targets, and are captured or destroyed as they are found, regardless of their individual value monetarily. From mortars to scuds, depleting your enemy's ability to support its soldiers with artillery of any size is paramount to winning engagements.
It's about the rockets dumbass, one weighs just 300kg a smaller system will provide the same range etc. given the same rockets, it's obvious.
Everything in the US military costs an ass load because it is expected to work under all conditions and have a service life in decades. The HIMARS needs to work at -40 and 120 F, it needs to be resistant to constant shock, vibration, salt fog, sand, dust, etc. It needs to be electrically resistant to HEMP and lightening strikes, etc, etc, etc.
Have a Mil Std for light reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIL-STD-810
> b-b-but it's still cheaper
You've seen this brainlet's previous responses. Sources and more logic isn't going to help him
Great example is when Mexico got a bunch of Russian equipment during the collapse of the USSR and early days of independent Russia after mostly buying French and German stuff.
>After Russia could not make the agreed upon payments to Mexico in either US dollars or Mexican pesos an agreement was brokered where Russia would settle the debt with a direct trade of vehicles and food products. Mexico was repaid with several dozen military helicopters, armored vehicles and multiple cargo vessels loaded with vodka and seafood. Much of the seafood spoiled in transit and the Mexican government refused to accept it. Russia agreed to pay the remainder of the balance with two Mi26 heavy lift helicopters. Russia agreed it would take back the spoiled seafood and dispose of it properly. Instead the food was dumped by Russian sailors off the coast of Cozumel where it temporarily damaged the local eco system. The odor of the several hundred tonnes of rotten fish could be detected on shore 5 kilometers away. Russia has since failed to supply vital parts for maintenance and repairs. Many of the Mexican fleet of Russian helicopters now sits unused. In active service, many have been replaced with American and European helicopters. Russia has claimed that the maintenance contracts with Mexico are not valid as they were made by a previous administration.
That's hilarious. Hundreds of tonnes of rotting fish and a fleet of useless helos
Stuff the helicopters with fish and send it. What even is a cooling chain?
This is such a fricking Russian thing to do, its unreal.
No, because in war time is money more than any other scenario.
Off the shelf solutions are normally shit when it comes to a vehicle designed for a specific purpose. I'm sure the frames of a commercial grade truck would be bent if they attempted to fire rockets, etc.
Same reason the post office uses custom made trucks.
My thoughts exactly. It's the rockets that are special, not the vehicles. It's like claiming the bottle of some miracle pill is more valuable than the pills that actually do the miracle.
>Why do you need a specialized 3 million dollar launch vehicle for these rockets
So you can turn it into a drone, throw it on a C-130 or C-17 and island hope blasting shit, being gone before the GMLRS hits. Also, being able to link with the F-35 for targeting data, and control. The actual truck is trivial in the grand scheme of the total price. You're paying for the electronics and capabilities from them.
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/06/16/us-army-fires-autonomous-launcher-in-pacific-focused-demo/
https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/usaf-passes-targeting-data-to-himars-inside-boeing-c-17/140166.article
http://alert5.com/2018/10/07/f-35b-connects-to-himars-for-rocket-shot/
Not really. China already developed a single launch solution for Type-63 rocket
>b-but it's unguided
Fricking 2.5" FZ rockets have SAL options nowadays and a MRL version have also been developed. If there's no reason why a single launch GMLRS couldn't be developed aside from lockmart being a greedy israelite and didn't want to kill their profit margin
We spent a lot of money on coming up with all this sci-fi shit to kill those vodka swilling, FAS having sub-humans. So at the very least we're gonna give them to the Ukies and sit back to watch the show. Do you actually know any Americans?
I think 3mil is a bit of a bargain really, for that you get a heavy truck which costs 500k or so as a basic unit
Modified with armour, hydraulics, comms gear, the launcher, the loading system for the launcher, the fire control system and the networking gear- all that sort of stuff if you built it as a one-off would be quite expensive and way more than 3mil. Being this is a production line item and its come into fully fledged output the price goes down over time too, especially if you're like Poland and say, I want hundreds of the things. They're going to get a discount on those and probably a bit of a lower cost on the rockets as well.
Got to buy in bulk, that's sort of why the western MIC is something to be greatly feared. It can make a lot of stuff that works, then scale up production rates very fast across a lot of decentralised supply lines and that's sort of what gives it that edge over say India, China or Russia in that there's really robust amounts of 'slack' in the production line that can essentially mean its built in a leased truck factory from stuff boxed in across some of the fastest logistics routes on earth.
homies got to understand, the MIC might look like a fat sleepy guy, but you wake him up with few dollaryroos under the nose and he'll come out swinging like heavyweight motherfricker
It uses regular truck as launch platform. It is everything else that makes it expensive.
>Thinking we care about cost, as long as we can makes vatniks seethe
This.
I'm antiwar,, was against the follies of Vietnam and Iraq. Think Bush should have been charged for war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq and Trump for treason for conspiring with the Russians and selling top secret documents he stole.
But goddamn, I fully support arming Ukraine to watch them bleed out the Vatinks.
>using state made memes
wtf are you doing?
>Why do you need a specialized 3 million dollar launch vehicle
Safety protocols. To make sure armor works as it should, to make sure it can drive X miles as it should, and most importantly, to make sure that it can launch the rockets without blowing up. Yes you can launch them from a pipe, but would you want to be anywhere nearby?
Armour for the sake of protection against shrapnel and small arms. Don't want your multi million vehicle to get taken out because minor damage.
no there's value in having many rockets in the same vehicle for multi rocket fire missions. trailers just make thing more complicated when you need to stabilize the thing before launching rockets.
if anything i'd drive around with rocket trucks that have an integrated crane so they can reload faster and independently. that way you just need to drive full pods,fuel and supplies to them and take away spent pods instead of worrying about loadingunloading on the supply side.
also pic related, israeli offroad artillery rocket buggy
Good enough isn't as good as better which is what the entire world is seeing play out in Ukraine. Dumbass.
You need the interface computer to tell the missile where it's going. That said it is just price gouging like the rest of the MIC and I'm sure plenty of companies that would never get a contract could do it for $500k.
the FMTV costs between 160 to 300 grand
it’s all the specialized systems that cost money