This thing can launch and move instead of staying stationary. Retaliatory artillery will arrive minutes after they've de-assed the area. Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to realize how pissed the enemy will get. Demotivation in the ranks + dead ruskies or traumatic brain injuries abound. Good times will be had.
It isn't. It's a sacrifice they made to render it operationally mobile and air-transportable. The USA is building a two-pod unmanned version while SK has a two-pod 8x8.
Doesn't change the fact they're a legacy system that was designed around the unguided rocket and early ATACMS blocks
GMLRS upgrade is an enhancement to the M270 but most platforms designed after GMLRS such as HIMARS, WR-300 Homar , LIMAWS(R) etc. are single-pod launchers.
An exception is Worst Korea's K239 Chunmoo/K-MLRS system
It's a UAE Army-specific thing; they have a tiny manpower pool so they wanted to condense a 30-person BM-21 Grad battery to a 3-man truck. The UAE doesn't do much expeditionary stuff overseas so it doesn't have to be airmobile, which opens up a lot of interesting design possibilities.
I think they had to cut the number of rockets on HIMARS because it's a wheeled vehicle.
Since both platforms can use a variety of rockets/missiles the debate is on cost, protection, deployment time and speed on x terrain.
Personally I would put my money on MLRS which happens to be the system my country has.
>i've heard m270 is an absolute shitshow in terms of maintenance
Maintenance problems aren't a straightforward thing.
As an example Finland and Norway both ordered the NH-90 transport helicopter.
Both nations had issues with it from the start but Finland managed to fix things and turn NH-90 into a reliable helicopter whereas Norway had to ditch the whole program and buy UH-60 to replace every single helicopter.
Granted the NH-90 helicopters weren't exactly the same models but still.
Norway bought them too for anti submarine role. Now they demand their money back because they still aren't ready and the ASW weapons they were supposed to use are outdated and not produced anymore.
Yeah, but the post was talking about troop transports and Uh-60, which is the swedish clusterfrick. The Norwegian NH90-program is a completely different shitshow that we spent waaay to much time trying to fix
Far as I remember i think i read that Norway is considering renting blackhawks to fill the gap until they choose a new copter. Unless they somehow get a major price reduction in current farce.
2 years ago
Anonymous
We have the Bell 412 for Army-needs, the NH is for Navy. There has been some talk of leasing the SeaHawk, but nothing concrete yet. But the SH60 has been floated as a solution for like 10 years now, we should just do a FMS and get it over with
>You mean Finland and Sweden?
Ah yes! Quite right.
But Norway too seems to have the same problems with Sweden and they are looking for an alternative.
Curious.... why do Sweden and Norway have so much trouble with NH90 while Finland doesn't?
When HIMARS was designed they were primarily using GMLRS and ATACMs already, so the vehicle is less MLRS (where quantity is important) and more of a precision strike asset.
One thing to remember as well, is that both M270 and HIMARS can reload very quickly with their podded ammunition and integrated reloading crane.
10 times faster than Uragan or Smerch (which requires a separate reloading vehicle as well)
Weighs 20,000lbs less and has far higher road mobility and ease of maintenance
Doesn't need tracks/tank transporters, more fuel efficient, moves faster to avoid counterbattery fire, and can be carried by more aircraft.
This thing can launch and move instead of staying stationary. Retaliatory artillery will arrive minutes after they've de-assed the area. Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to realize how pissed the enemy will get. Demotivation in the ranks + dead ruskies or traumatic brain injuries abound. Good times will be had.
2 vehicles instead of 1 also means you only lose 50% of your firepower if one them breaks down
Mobility, you can set up, shoot, and leave before counter battery.
It isn't. It's a sacrifice they made to render it operationally mobile and air-transportable. The USA is building a two-pod unmanned version while SK has a two-pod 8x8.
M270 was designed around unguided rockets with a significantly larger CEP so needed twice as many to render the same effect on target
pretty sure M270 and HIMARS have the same launchers and can use the same rockets
HIMARS is just half the number of rockets
M270 was designed long before the improved rockets it can use today.
The rockets were made backwards compatible to keep things simple.
Pretty sure M270 is also much older sister that did not have more modern rockets when it was taken into service.
Most M270s were upgraded to fire them decades ago tho.
Doesn't change the fact they're a legacy system that was designed around the unguided rocket and early ATACMS blocks
GMLRS upgrade is an enhancement to the M270 but most platforms designed after GMLRS such as HIMARS, WR-300 Homar , LIMAWS(R) etc. are single-pod launchers.
An exception is Worst Korea's K239 Chunmoo/K-MLRS system
thoughts?
Fund it!
I think that is a waste of a good chassis.
This. Rocket artillery doesn't need to get close to fight (any more), it doesn't need armor or much offroad capabilities.
what are the handlebars above the pods for ?
Reloading.
>1969+53
>not counterbatterying an entire theater in one go
ngmi
christ it's real? I thought it was one of those chinese meme 3d animations
Arabs buy all kinds of stupid shot of it looks cool when shooting.
It's a UAE Army-specific thing; they have a tiny manpower pool so they wanted to condense a 30-person BM-21 Grad battery to a 3-man truck. The UAE doesn't do much expeditionary stuff overseas so it doesn't have to be airmobile, which opens up a lot of interesting design possibilities.
A weapon to surpass metal gear
The fact that this is extremely impressive unfortunately doesn't make it any less of a bad idea.
I think they had to cut the number of rockets on HIMARS because it's a wheeled vehicle.
Since both platforms can use a variety of rockets/missiles the debate is on cost, protection, deployment time and speed on x terrain.
Personally I would put my money on MLRS which happens to be the system my country has.
i've heard m270 is an absolute shitshow in terms of maintenance
>i've heard m270 is an absolute shitshow in terms of maintenance
yeah and every other tracked vehicle in existence
>i've heard m270 is an absolute shitshow in terms of maintenance
Maintenance problems aren't a straightforward thing.
As an example Finland and Norway both ordered the NH-90 transport helicopter.
Both nations had issues with it from the start but Finland managed to fix things and turn NH-90 into a reliable helicopter whereas Norway had to ditch the whole program and buy UH-60 to replace every single helicopter.
Granted the NH-90 helicopters weren't exactly the same models but still.
You mean Finland and Sweden?
Norway bought them too for anti submarine role. Now they demand their money back because they still aren't ready and the ASW weapons they were supposed to use are outdated and not produced anymore.
Yeah, but the post was talking about troop transports and Uh-60, which is the swedish clusterfrick. The Norwegian NH90-program is a completely different shitshow that we spent waaay to much time trying to fix
Far as I remember i think i read that Norway is considering renting blackhawks to fill the gap until they choose a new copter. Unless they somehow get a major price reduction in current farce.
We have the Bell 412 for Army-needs, the NH is for Navy. There has been some talk of leasing the SeaHawk, but nothing concrete yet. But the SH60 has been floated as a solution for like 10 years now, we should just do a FMS and get it over with
>You mean Finland and Sweden?
Ah yes! Quite right.
But Norway too seems to have the same problems with Sweden and they are looking for an alternative.
Curious.... why do Sweden and Norway have so much trouble with NH90 while Finland doesn't?
Because it's incredibly fast in terms of shooting and then being somewhere else.
Himars wienerpit is so fricking ugly tho.
Wheels and better horsepower/weight
Tracks are a cope for vehicles that don't have enough horsepower.
When HIMARS was designed they were primarily using GMLRS and ATACMs already, so the vehicle is less MLRS (where quantity is important) and more of a precision strike asset.
One thing to remember as well, is that both M270 and HIMARS can reload very quickly with their podded ammunition and integrated reloading crane.
10 times faster than Uragan or Smerch (which requires a separate reloading vehicle as well)
Not to mention that you can hardly carry all the ammo for Uragan in one truck because they are packed into single crates.