The 70KM Sniper

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#1
DID says:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...&utm_source=did&utm_medium=textlink#more-5236


Canada’s military has decided that it needs longer-range artillery to support its front-line troops, and they think they’ve found it. The tracked M270 MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) was originally developed as an assault-breaker weapon, meant to destroy Warsaw Pact formations as they advanced into NATO territory. It first achieved prominence in the 1991 Desert Storm operation, where its M26 227mm rockets’ performance against Iraqi troops gave it the nickname “steel rain.” The current war has seen significant changes, in particular the GPS-guided M30/M31 GMLRS rocket. It coverts the system from an area-effect weapon to something British forces call “the 70 km sniper.” The British have even modified their M270s for use in the Afghan theater, while the USA has used the M270 and its smaller, truck-mounted M142 HIMARS cousin with great success in Iraq. See DID’s coverage regarding their use during key battles in Tal Afar.

Canada also serves in Afghanistan, and has shipped a handful of M777 ultra-lightweight towed howitzers and GPS-guided Excalibur shells into theater. Those weapons offer effective responses to the Taliban’s Chinese-made mortars and rockets, and allied support from longer-range systems like the Dutch PzH-2000NL mobile howitzers and British MLRS systems has supplemented those efforts. Now a combination of those experiences, American and British successes, and the need for a longer-range strike option that doesn’t depend on the presence of allied airpower and good conditions for its use, are pushing the Canadians toward an MLRS buy of their own….
Do I see a Brit change of tactics in the offing? How to exploit 70KM depth fire? Rather than use UAV's are we going to be using ISTAR regiments and OP's again?
 

Alsacien

MIA
Moderator
#2
Mr Happy said:
DID says:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...&utm_source=did&utm_medium=textlink#more-5236


Canada’s military has decided that it needs longer-range artillery to support its front-line troops, and they think they’ve found it. The tracked M270 MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) was originally developed as an assault-breaker weapon, meant to destroy Warsaw Pact formations as they advanced into NATO territory. It first achieved prominence in the 1991 Desert Storm operation, where its M26 227mm rockets’ performance against Iraqi troops gave it the nickname “steel rain.” The current war has seen significant changes, in particular the GPS-guided M30/M31 GMLRS rocket. It coverts the system from an area-effect weapon to something British forces call “the 70 km sniper.” The British have even modified their M270s for use in the Afghan theater, while the USA has used the M270 and its smaller, truck-mounted M142 HIMARS cousin with great success in Iraq. See DID’s coverage regarding their use during key battles in Tal Afar.

Canada also serves in Afghanistan, and has shipped a handful of M777 ultra-lightweight towed howitzers and GPS-guided Excalibur shells into theater. Those weapons offer effective responses to the Taliban’s Chinese-made mortars and rockets, and allied support from longer-range systems like the Dutch PzH-2000NL mobile howitzers and British MLRS systems has supplemented those efforts. Now a combination of those experiences, American and British successes, and the need for a longer-range strike option that doesn’t depend on the presence of allied airpower and good conditions for its use, are pushing the Canadians toward an MLRS buy of their own….
Do I see a Brit change of tactics in the offing? How to exploit 70KM depth fire? Rather than use UAV's are we going to be using ISTAR regiments and OP's again?
If weapons keep getting smarter it won't be long before they ID their targets via Facebook and bill themselves to the targets Paypal account.....
 
#3
[/quote]

Do I see a Brit change of tactics in the offing? How to exploit 70KM depth fire? Rather than use UAV's are we going to be using ISTAR regiments and OP's again?[/quote]

One of the many tasks a UAV can perform, is as an airborne OP.
 
#4
Anything with that kind of range would be well employed as counterbattery artillery, well out of range of enemy artillery and able to protect the shorter range guns, and so would be guided by STA batteries.

If you wanted to use it as long-range artillery to hit targets deep in the enemy rear; POL points, bridges, command posts etc then you'd have to use UAVs or other aerial observation to observe the fall of shot if you wanted to keep your OP party away from the enemy.
 
#5
Err we've had MLRS in Afghanistan simce 07 so not really a recent change of operational tactics.

We now have satellite guided ordinance which can be used to reduce collateral damage in an around urbanised areas. I believe the accuracy is 6m in 60Km.

The next shift, which will possibly be launched from MLRS will be "fire and forget" rounds which will loiter and can therefore be used to protect patrols whereby ambushes can be immediately met with heavy ordnance.

Have a look for videos of the B1 in action on youtube, I think (please dont quote me on this) that it was 35 Bty (well done Dutch Vinny and Brett!)
 
#6
Mr Happy said:
Do I see a Brit change of tactics in the offing? How to exploit 70KM depth fire? Rather than use UAV's are we going to be using ISTAR regiments and OP's again?
Call me reference the answers to all of this mate.
 
#7
Bravo_Zulu said:
Anything with that kind of range would be well employed as counterbattery artillery, well out of range of enemy artillery and able to protect the shorter range guns, and so would be guided by STA batteries.

If you wanted to use it as long-range artillery to hit targets deep in the enemy rear; POL points, bridges, command posts etc then you'd have to use UAVs or other aerial observation to observe the fall of shot if you wanted to keep your OP party away from the enemy.
I think the cold war ended nigh on 20 years ago...
 
#8
Bravo_Zulu said:
Anything with that kind of range would be well employed as counterbattery artillery, well out of range of enemy artillery and able to protect the shorter range guns, and so would be guided by STA batteries.

If you wanted to use it as long-range artillery to hit targets deep in the enemy rear; POL points, bridges, command posts etc then you'd have to use UAVs or other aerial observation to observe the fall of shot if you wanted to keep your OP party away from the enemy.
The ammunition allows us as gunners to prosecute targets over a large distance of force deployment with greater percentage of guaranteed CFF in TIC and has been highly successful in Afghanistan

It is the current platform of choice when patrolling outside the ranges of the guns or a high degree of accuracy is required. The doctrine you refer to has changed for us all in the gunner fraternity, genfor/soviet theory no longer has any relevance in todays high tempo ops. From grid square to metre square. Send me a PM if you need any information regarding the thread.
 
#9
Sparky says
"I believe the accuracy is 6m in 60Km."
Amazing.
When I but a pup late 60's The RA where saying in recruitment adverts they could drop a 'Shell' in a barrel at X miles.
Some one challenged them to do so and the RA then said that a 'Barrel' was 70 mtrs diameter.
I do hope that he 6 at 60 is spot on.
john
 
#10
This just adds to the debate on the airspace in theatre. I know the 1st 10,000ft is getting REALLY busy and the deconfliction there is a major C2 issue that will take some working out.
 
#11
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
This just adds to the debate on the airspace in theatre. I know the 1st 10,000ft is getting REALLY busy and the deconfliction there is a major C2 issue that will take some working out.
Not at all it is a simple process which takes no time at all.
 
#12
sparky8 said:
The next shift, which will possibly be launched from MLRS will be "fire and forget" rounds which will loiter and can therefore be used to protect patrols whereby ambushes can be immediately met with heavy ordnance.
UK is already working on a loitering missile called "Fire shadow", even the yanks have a version of it for one of their requirements.
 
#13
GunnersQuadrant said:
Not at all it is a simple process which takes no time at all.
For whom? The last ACC convinced me, with extensive evidence, that it was a hellish task that would only get worse. I'm looking at it from tha Light Blue perspective rather than Gunner.
 
#14
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
GunnersQuadrant said:
Not at all it is a simple process which takes no time at all.
For whom? The last ACC convinced me, with extensive evidence, that it was a hellish task that would only get worse. I'm looking at it from tha Light Blue perspective rather than Gunner.
... I suspect (as the opinion is coming from the Gunner Borg) that the proposed solution is "gunner control of the forward battlezone".. "nothing manned below 20 grand".. :roll:
 
#15
jonwilly said:
Sparky says
"I believe the accuracy is 6m in 60Km."
Amazing.
When I but a pup late 60's The RA where saying in recruitment adverts they could drop a 'Shell' in a barrel at X miles.
Some one challenged them to do so and the RA then said that a 'Barrel' was 70 mtrs diameter.
I do hope that he 6 at 60 is spot on.
john
GMLRS is accurate as the grid that is fed into it. Moreover, its 'sniping' capability degrades rather when the target moves 50 yds between the fire mission being called and the round arriving. Moreover, all GPS/INS guided munitions are vulnerable to degradations in GPS coverage, so what is great for Afghan might not be so great when we go toe-to-toe with, say, the Chinese.

GMLRS is a great addition to our capability but is not a 'panacea' weapon (can any be considered thus?). It will complement existing systems and Air/Avn.
 
#16
not having an extensive knowledge of foot patrol's or arty back up but i do believe i'd feel a hell of alot better off knowing i was dropped off 3 k back to tab into a position already well smegged by the big guns. and most the wailing civvi's are harbouring Terry that has just been smegged anyhow...

I'm not one for smashing a place to bits however i'd rather they went then any one of our own. The media doesn't report anything worthwhile only what sells so i'm sure some oik can be drowned by government and the figures for civ pop can be 're-assessed'
 
#17
flipflop said:
GMLRS is accurate as the grid that is fed into it. Moreover, its 'sniping' capability degrades rather when the target moves 50 yds between the fire mission being called and the round arriving. Moreover, all GPS/INS guided munitions are vulnerable to degradations in GPS coverage, so what is great for Afghan might not be so great when we go toe-to-toe with, say, the Chinese.
I guess what you really want is something that can be fired into the last known target location and then, if the target has moved, use onboard sensors to identify the target and guide it in.
 
#18
Did anybody notice the article got the fricking calibre wrong - MLRS is 298mm calibre - or have they shrunk in the wash?
 
#19
rickshaw-major said:
Did anybody notice the article got the fricking calibre wrong - MLRS is 298mm calibre - or have they shrunk in the wash?
These must be the pregnant ones, the standard ones are 227mm.

What was wrong was asserting that MLRS was originally designed as an 'assault breaker'. In reality it was primarily for counter battery, the Sovs had massively increased their artillery in the 1970s.

The problem with precision munitions is that they need precision targets.
 
#20
HE117 said:
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
GunnersQuadrant said:
Not at all it is a simple process which takes no time at all.
For whom? The last ACC convinced me, with extensive evidence, that it was a hellish task that would only get worse. I'm looking at it from tha Light Blue perspective rather than Gunner.
... I suspect (as the opinion is coming from the Gunner Borg) that the proposed solution is "gunner control of the forward battlezone".. "nothing manned below 20 grand".. :roll:
GQ, I suspect his "solution" is slightly more simplified than even your idea HE117 :twisted:

Re role of MLRS, I always thought it was counter-battery. But I suspect it would have been handy as an assault breaker.

Grid square removal service and all that :)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Ord_Sgt Current Affairs, News and Analysis 1
E The NAAFI Bar 18
S Army Reserve 10

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top