UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

GMLRS and the future

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

GMLRS and the future

Postby Lord Jim » 07 Sep 2018, 08:09

The British Army needs to achieve greater range from its artillery systems. Here is one option that seems to have a lot of potential whether we fire it from our existing heavy GMRLS launchers or in invest in a lighter weight HIMARS style platform.


User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8745
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 07 Sep 2018, 09:52

Half the cost! On wheels... would fit the bill for dispersed operations over a wide area (AKA the "Strike" concept).

May also solve the mystery why Finland first spent the money to upgrade the GMLRS fire control systems to support ATACMS... but then did not buy the missiles?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby Lord Jim » 07 Sep 2018, 11:32

It wasn't totally clear if the cost was just for the new missiles compared to the ATACMS or for this plus HIMARS. Mind you if we retain our GMLRS tracked launchers that is four of these beauties per launcher and a world of hurt on the receiving end.

Voldemort
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: 26 Jul 2018, 06:32
Location: Finland

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby Voldemort » 13 Sep 2018, 20:08

Much rather I'd pay attention to volume of fire. SFMs with tens of skeets like Bonus raining down EFP death or FAE to take out your hidy hole and the next block too.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby Lord Jim » 20 Sep 2018, 06:00

From what I have seem, each of these proposed missiles could contain the number of sensor fused munitions equivalent to four Bonus rounds so a salvo from a single GMLRS launcher would be the equivalent of sixteen 155mm Guns, but at for greater range and accuracy. Now multiply that by the number of launchers in a battery and as I said originally the target is in for a very painful time.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8745
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 20 Sep 2018, 06:50

One's own children are always the prettiest?

Or just a matter of the detail we know?

The new AW (was the FAE standing for Area Effects, which would be the same)... which the UK hasn't ordered, of course, plugs a serious hole in capability: the ability to attack OpFor formations not yet engaged, even though the warhead is only effective against soft and semi-soft targets.

Here the weight of fire needs to combine with the element of surprise (which is possible, because of the range). The unitary warhead is pretty much for sniping - with precision - against pretty much stationary targets. At best, command posts can present such. What is evident is the types of warheads listed in the below, for other "operators" of rocket artillery, is that they are not restricting their target set.

Some comparisons here:. Key Artillery Rocket Capabilities , between
M270A1 MLRS/ HIMARS

Smerch

WeiShi2 (WS-2)

Sorry, the table comes out messy... one day even such a format will be possible to bring over (pdf is a predominant format in sources!)

Range
15

84
km
Current generation
of rockets
has a
range
of
25

90
km, with
120
km
rockets in
development
Currently fielded
with
200
-
km
range;
latest variants
with
ranges
of
approximately 350
km
Accuracy
GPS/INS guidance
of
5

10
-
m
CEP
Course
correction
available:
0.23
percent
of range
claimed
(~207
m
at
90
km)
GPS/INS guidance
available
200
-
m
CEP claimed
Typical
w
arhead
s
ize
90
kg
95

100
kg
200
kg
Warhead
t
ypes
a
vailable
Unitary High
Explosive
DPICM (limited
use)
Germans have a
s
te
e
rable mine
warhead
4 types of submunition warheads
2 types of precision submunitions
antitank
mines
Fuel
-
a
ir
e
xplosive
p
arachute

retarded
HE
-
Frag
Hardened HE (earth penetrating)
DPICM
-
type
submunitions
Comprehensive effect submunitions
Fuel Air Explosive
HE
-
Frag Incendiary
Unmanned
a
erial
s
ystems
SOURCE:
Jane’s Armor and Artillery

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Member
Posts: 942
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby Poiuytrewq » 20 Sep 2018, 22:14

Future Land Indirect Fires, unveiled by MBMA at #DVD2018 today, are a set of concepts that leverage technologies from the UK Complex Weapons Portfolio to provide novel surface-to-surface precision strike capabilities for land forces at a brigade/division level.
image.jpg
image.jpg
image.jpg
Is this a realistic option or simply cost prohibitive?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 8745
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 21 Sep 2018, 07:00

Poiuytrewq wrote:or simply cost prohibitive?


Put those on the back of the Archer platform (an armoured dumper truck) and a lot of the cost will go away.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby Lord Jim » 21 Sep 2018, 14:39

Isn't this another case of reinventing the wheel, where comparable systems already exist?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby Lord Jim » 24 Oct 2018, 02:31

Here is something we maybe should purchase as a matter of urgency when available. The article doesn't mention which types of rocket will be available in the ER format but doubling the range and then some would certainly provide the RA with a superior Counter Battery capability.

https://www.janes.com/article/83720/aus ... r-mid-2019

J. Tattersall
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 21 Dec 2016, 20:30
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby J. Tattersall » 24 Oct 2018, 07:25

Quite possibly an option. However one also needs to.plan for beyond GMLRS, whether that might entail going down a US or European route, perhaps some of the concepts which MBDA showcased recently.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 2110
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: GMLRS and the future

Postby Lord Jim » 24 Oct 2018, 14:59

The US is investing heavily in greatly increasing the capability of the MLRS with rockets having ranges form 150km to over 300km. Unitary and cargo variants are in development so following their lead would make sense. I personally believe we should look at replacing out heavy tracked launchers with lighter system based around HIMARS but using a chassis common to one already in UK use. A lightweight precision weapon system similar to that used in Afghanistan but on a SP chassis would also be welcome to support out light and middle weight formations, and their are a number of these already in service or soon will be. Ideally pursuing a ground launched Brimstone would be the ideal option in my opinion, given the flexibility of its guidance systems and the low risk of such a programme allow for rapid entry into service, funding permitting.


Return to “British Army”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests