Well currently 26th Regiment RA has 3 batteries for total of 27 systems. If they just fully covert 3rd Regiment RHA to MRLS, that would bring 6 batteries. Only thing is that FS is having only two MLRS batteries per regiment, third battery being equipped with Jackal/Ajax tactical group (in unknown role). Considering that DRS should have two armoured cavalry and one light recce regiments, not sure why these regiments needs to have an Ajax/Jackal tactical group instead of third artillery battery.Rentaghost wrote: ↑22 Sep 2022, 14:49 Presumably if it went the full 100% increase from that tweet they'd be assuming 6 regular batteries? So two full regular 3 battery regiments (Starting from the 40 (ish) number)
M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Because FST is considered a specialist role with specialist equipment and communication? Whilst GMLRS reduces the gunnery element of the role, it does increase the JTAC elements.sol wrote: ↑22 Sep 2022, 15:07Well currently 26th Regiment RA has 3 batteries for total of 27 systems. If they just fully covert 3rd Regiment RHA to MRLS, that would bring 6 batteries. Only thing is that FS is having only two MLRS batteries per regiment, third battery being equipped with Jackal/Ajax tactical group (in unknown role). Considering that DRS should have two armoured cavalry and one light recce regiments, not sure why these regiments needs to have an Ajax/Jackal tactical group instead of third artillery battery.Rentaghost wrote: ↑22 Sep 2022, 14:49 Presumably if it went the full 100% increase from that tweet they'd be assuming 6 regular batteries? So two full regular 3 battery regiments (Starting from the 40 (ish) number)
I wonder if we'll see a change in one of the Deep Strike reserve units moving to MLRS. It's relatively low operator training burden compared to AS90. H licence being the hardest part for reservists.
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
https://www.army-technology.com/analysi ... lrs-fleet/
I admire the effort we will be going to in seeking units.To this end, a range of sources are being sought to potentially acquire secondhand M270 platforms, including those acting as gate guards, in museums, or in service with foreign nations,
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
One of the things that will happen as a result of Ukraine is I suspect that vehicle and other kit disposals will be drastically cut back. Withams and L Jacksons Ltd. may find themselves very short of stock in the future...MoD will be hoarding it.
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Yes I think the UK mod / gov have realised they have been Cought with their pants down in a time of need and they scrambling to sort it out ,well who would have quessed ,not like plenty of people haven't told them for years , especially the Americans lol ,what a joke , politicians eh , defence first my arse ,they couldn't give a shite ,now the chickens have come home to roost
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
I find it odd that if they are wishing to increase the number of mlrs systems by such an amount they would choice this route. I think it’s right that they need to expand this area but would of thought they should of looked at getting the launcher system on a man truck instead or as potentially a boxer module rather than going down this route.
- These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 2):
- RunningStrong • dmereifield
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Maybe its fits in with current training and supply chains?SW1 wrote: ↑23 Sep 2022, 17:56 I find it odd that if they are wishing to increase the number of mlrs systems by such an amount they would choice this route. I think it’s right that they need to expand this area but would of thought they should of looked at getting the launcher system on a man truck instead or as potentially a boxer module rather than going down this route.
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Possibly but if your needing to refurbish gate guards and the like that’s quite the expense. Taking the computer systems and launcher of the tracked platform and moving it onto trucks we have lots off would require systems engineering sure but can’t see the training being that much different it would be the same system just on a truck. Maybe with the rubber bands there isn’t much of a difference in deployability but would of thought long term having mlrs and sky sabre on the same base platform would be of benefit for the artillery.Jdam wrote: ↑23 Sep 2022, 18:33Maybe its fits in with current training and supply chains?SW1 wrote: ↑23 Sep 2022, 17:56 I find it odd that if they are wishing to increase the number of mlrs systems by such an amount they would choice this route. I think it’s right that they need to expand this area but would of thought they should of looked at getting the launcher system on a man truck instead or as potentially a boxer module rather than going down this route.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
100% agree. We never needed HIMARS, we already have loads of tactical mobility trucks in service. If we're struggling on M270 chassis then MAN truck all day.SW1 wrote: ↑23 Sep 2022, 17:56 I find it odd that if they are wishing to increase the number of mlrs systems by such an amount they would choice this route. I think it’s right that they need to expand this area but would of thought they should of looked at getting the launcher system on a man truck instead or as potentially a boxer module rather than going down this route.
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Well let's see if we can get the OEM to grant us a license to develp an 8x8 that carries the same launcher as the M270, accepting all developmental costs ourselves.ALternatively could we buy the South Korean System that may be able to be adapted to fire the advanced Rockets we are looking at.
Given we are looking at between twenty and thirty additional M270 Launch Vehicles, I am surprised we couldn't gat the US Army to part with a few of its holdings of 500 M370s. Especially as they are very keen on additioanl HIMARS which they see as more deployable , or that is the impression I get.
Mind you HIMARS does have a few things in its favour. Any purchased would already have the upgrades needed to fire the advanced rockets up to and including those with a range up to 500km. Secondly it has a logistics footprint that is substantially lower than the M270 and it is easier and cheaper to train the crew. HIMARS will also have far greater in theatre mobility as well as not requiring the use of a HET to reach said theatre.
Our current holdings of M270s will allow the Army to stand up two regular Regiments each of three Batteries of six Launchers. I can see the benefits of acquiring say 24 HIMARS to equip a Regiment with the same number of same sized Batteries, as an alternative to hunting for second hand additional M270s. Such a regiment would be more suited to supporting deployments of lighter formations whilst still being able to support our Heavy formation when needed. A wheeled twelve rocket platform would work and gain teh Army some benefits whilst losing others.
My personal preference would be for a Regiment of HIMARS but for these to use the 4x4 MAN platform already in use by the British Army.
Given we are looking at between twenty and thirty additional M270 Launch Vehicles, I am surprised we couldn't gat the US Army to part with a few of its holdings of 500 M370s. Especially as they are very keen on additioanl HIMARS which they see as more deployable , or that is the impression I get.
Mind you HIMARS does have a few things in its favour. Any purchased would already have the upgrades needed to fire the advanced rockets up to and including those with a range up to 500km. Secondly it has a logistics footprint that is substantially lower than the M270 and it is easier and cheaper to train the crew. HIMARS will also have far greater in theatre mobility as well as not requiring the use of a HET to reach said theatre.
Our current holdings of M270s will allow the Army to stand up two regular Regiments each of three Batteries of six Launchers. I can see the benefits of acquiring say 24 HIMARS to equip a Regiment with the same number of same sized Batteries, as an alternative to hunting for second hand additional M270s. Such a regiment would be more suited to supporting deployments of lighter formations whilst still being able to support our Heavy formation when needed. A wheeled twelve rocket platform would work and gain teh Army some benefits whilst losing others.
My personal preference would be for a Regiment of HIMARS but for these to use the 4x4 MAN platform already in use by the British Army.
- These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post (total 2):
- wargame_insomniac • leonard
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Lockheed Martin could upgrade British M270s at Ampthill.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... rs-upgrade
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... rs-upgrade
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Seems like there is request for 75 M270 and 10 MLRS recovering vehicles, but funding for only 61 & 8 respectively. Still significant increase over current numbers
- These users liked the author sol for the post:
- wargame_insomniac
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Funding will be the key, but good news on the increased need.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
What are the current numbers? Are these actually for the UK or for donating to Ukraine in due course?
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Not sure, between 35 and 40.
Just for UK, all those should be upgraded to M270A2 for two regular and one TA regiment.dmereifield wrote: ↑29 Nov 2022, 17:46 Are these actually for the UK or for donating to Ukraine in due course?
- These users liked the author sol for the post:
- dmereifield
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5632
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Very good news this could now allow M270A2 batteries to join the armoured BCT's if neededsol wrote: ↑29 Nov 2022, 20:20Not sure, between 35 and 40.
Just for UK, all those should be upgraded to M270A2 for two regular and one TA regiment.dmereifield wrote: ↑29 Nov 2022, 17:46 Are these actually for the UK or for donating to Ukraine in due course?
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Mentioned previously last year that MoD placed £315 million contract with Lockheed to update 44 M270 to A2 standard launchers to fire the new Precision Strike Missile (PrSM), range ~ 500 km, and is expected in service from 2024 replacing the ~300 km MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) fired from both the tracked M270 and wheeled HIMARS. Presuming £315 includes cost of the Precision Strike Missiles, how many have not seen any numbers quoted, (FY23 US Army showing $1.8 million cost per PrSM). Think remember Wallace saying this year in the light of Ukraine experience wants to increase the numbers?Tempest414 wrote: ↑30 Nov 2022, 10:00Very good news this could now allow M270A2 batteries to join the armoured BCT's if neededsol wrote: ↑29 Nov 2022, 20:20Not sure, between 35 and 40.
Just for UK, all those should be upgraded to M270A2 for two regular and one TA regiment.dmereifield wrote: ↑29 Nov 2022, 17:46 Are these actually for the UK or for donating to Ukraine in due course?
PS British Army never acquired the ATACMS and used the M270 for firing the shorter range M26 artillery rocket, GMLRS
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Yes, that was last year, since then 3 were sent to Ukraine + additional 3 which were replaced with Norway M270A0 which are not in active service currently, That would bring current fleet to 38 with additional three from Norway which were never upgraded.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5632
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
My point was that with an increase from 44 to 61 M270A2's as Sol has said this allows for 2 x Regt's and 1 Reserve regt and I was saying this could allow for a Battery to join a Armoured BCT if neededNickC wrote: ↑30 Nov 2022, 11:19Mentioned previously last year that MoD placed £315 million contract with Lockheed to update 44 M270 to A2 standard launchers to fire the new Precision Strike Missile (PrSM), range ~ 500 km, and is expected in service from 2024 replacing the ~300 km MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) fired from both the tracked M270 and wheeled HIMARS. Presuming £315 includes cost of the Precision Strike Missiles, how many have not seen any numbers quoted, (FY23 US Army showing $1.8 million cost per PrSM). Think remember Wallace saying this year in the light of Ukraine experience wants to increase the numbers?Tempest414 wrote: ↑30 Nov 2022, 10:00Very good news this could now allow M270A2 batteries to join the armoured BCT's if neededsol wrote: ↑29 Nov 2022, 20:20Not sure, between 35 and 40.
Just for UK, all those should be upgraded to M270A2 for two regular and one TA regiment.dmereifield wrote: ↑29 Nov 2022, 17:46 Are these actually for the UK or for donating to Ukraine in due course?
PS British Army never acquired the ATACMS and used the M270 for firing the shorter range M26 artillery rocket, GMLRS
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
Seems like no one is keen to part with their M270, even tho majority is not in actual service but in storage
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
There are plenty in storage in the US and other nations that have never been upgraded from M270 standard to A1. Many will want to go to HIMARS, particularly rather than paying the cost of upgrade from plain M270 to A2 and the increased running costs of M270.madhon wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 12:42 Trouble ahead ?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/17199 ... nce-update
Re: M270 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
HIMARS is not cheap. Lithuania will pay $492 million for package that includes:Timmymagic wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 14:55 There are plenty in storage in the US and other nations that have never been upgraded from M270 standard to A1. Many will want to go to HIMARS, particularly rather than paying the cost of upgrade from plain M270 to A2 and the increased running costs of M270.
... eight (8) M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) Launchers; thirty-six (36) M30A2 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) Alternative Warhead (AW) Missile Pods with Insensitive Munitions Propulsion System (IMPS); thirty-six (36) M31A2 GMLRS Unitary High Explosive (HE) Missile Pods; thirty-six (36) XM403 Extended Range GMLRS (ER GMLRS) Alternative Warhead (AW) Missile Pods with IMPS; thirty-six (36) XM404 Extended Range GMLRS (ER GMLRS) Unitary Pods with IMPS; and eighteen (18) M57 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) Missile Pods. Also included are M28A2 Low Cost Reduced Range Practice Rocket (LCRRPR) pods;
On the other hand, US paid $362 million for upgrading 50 M270 to M270A2 standard. Munition is probably really expansive but still, it is questionable if HIMARS is much cheaper solution. Maybe in long term, but it is also probably really hard, if not impossible, to buy M270 now.
Article is suggesting that after having talks with US, France, Germany and Finland. UK succeeded to get 7 additional vehicles, but still 14 short to those 61 funded and even further away from wished 75. US have hundreds in storage and Germany alone over 100 not used in active service. But if US and Germany are not ready to sell couple than it will not be easy for UK to achieve its goal.