Russian MRLS: Grad, Uragan, Smerch, Tornado-G/S

If you read the article I posted the link to, Platform-O was "approved", but then basically not used for anything important.

Because they assigned the task of designing this to a company without experience in making heavy vehicles of that size, the company decided to use electric drive in order to not design complex heavy duty hydropneumatic systems they had no experience in designing. But the drive train turned out way heavier than expected and the electric drive has loads of issues with crossing water. So, this does not have anywhere near the hauling performance it was supposed to have. Probably also really expensive since it seems to have used one electric engine per wheel. Supposedly it is now being redesigned to use one electric engine per axle.

Anyway, just like I said, the Russian government can fix this problem for Tornado-S by designing a new vehicle using the BAZ-6909 tractor. But for the larger theater systems like Iskander or Bal, or strategic systems like Yars, still need to find a replacement to Platform-O. It remains to be seen what the Russian government will do on this matter.

Why were they OK with iskander and S-400 trucks being BAZ but not with the tornado S? Why didnt they just mass produce tornado S on kamaz chassis with reloadable palette module?  There is no possible way this wouldve been troublesome to the russians. Is the BAZ autism also the reason the uragan 1M was canned?



Russians basically had a six shot himars with fully domestic components since 2009, yet 0 were produced.

Why does Russia need a HIMARS?

It doesnt. It needs massive amounts of tornado S launchers.

It doesnt. It needs massive amounts of tornado S launchers.

Russia started procuring them 2 years ago

AFAIK they don't look outwardly different compared to the Smerches however; probably the chassis is an updated one with some minor differences, but you'll need to know what to look for.

The photo you brought up was either some proposal or an export model

Here are the 9A54 TELARs of the Tornado-S complex actually in service:

It doesnt. It needs massive amounts of tornado S launchers.

Actually Tornado S and Tornado G are each as sophisticated as the other, so effectively you could have a battery of either scattered around the front line that would always be ready to fire or to run away at a seconds notice because all they need to hit any particular target is to receive its target coordinates and permission to fire... they can then stop anywhere they are, stabilise jacks down, elevation and traverse set automatically calculated by the system based on the rocket types carried... and whoosh... lower and straighten the rockets to the travel position, raise the stabiliser jacks and off we go and all those rockets from all those different vehicles should all start arriving on target together.

Even if the enemy detects the launches they come from 8 different locations and as they are rushing to get drones or just rocket artillery rounds there those artillery vehicles are gone and the airdefence vehicles are smacking down the first counter battery HIMARS launched... hey... even full power HATO can't deal with 8 Grad vehicles from 40km range or less firing 320 rockets at a couple of targets at one time... note if all the targets are enemy armour then those 320 rockets might have a total of 640 sensor fused guided top attack munitions using MMW radar and IR guidance (since 1996) with a self forging top attack munition.

GarryB wrote:Even if the enemy detects the launches they come from 8 different locations and as they are rushing to get drones or just rocket artillery rounds there those artillery vehicles are gone and the airdefence vehicles are smacking down the first counter battery HIMARS launched... hey... even full power HATO can't deal with 8 Grad vehicles from 40km range or less firing 320 rockets at a couple of targets at one time... note if all the targets are enemy armour then those 320 rockets might have a total of 640 sensor fused guided top attack munitions using MMW radar and IR guidance (since 1996) with a self forging top attack munition.

People tend to sleep on the Grad in favor of its larger sisters, but the Grad is so damn ubiquitous the Russians have a battery at the level of battalion when everyone else would have them at the brigade/division level.

Probably one of the main reasons why the numerically inferior Russians just don't swept off the field by their more numerous opponents is the fact that whenever their enemies mass for an attack, the Russians would just hammer them with their Grad until they're dust, then their defenses just deal with the shattered and battered remnants.

I find it a bit sad that they never did develop the 227 mm caliber further. Its basically a larger Grad at this point. Probably doesn't help that there are Grad rockets being developed with the Uragan's range, or that it just has more ammunition types available. Uragan only has the HEF, and cassette, smoke and illumination. They didn't even give it the self-guided anti-tank submunitions that Grad and Smerch have.

Totally agree, though it is interesting that the Uragan rockets at 220mm are the same calibre as the TOS rockets... with all the modularity and unification of design and other bollocks to reduce costs and make things easier etc etc, I can understand them having only two vehicles, that does make sense but there is not reason for the small light vehicle that is Grad with fixed tubes could not be complimented by the heavier vehicle with the ability to carry two pallets which might be 300mm (6 rockets per pallet) or 220mm (15 rockets per pallet.. astounding...) or 122mm ( say 25-30 rockets per pallet) would give you a useful choice.

Keep in mind when used on soft ground there is no reason why it couldn't just operate with one pallet present to keep the weight down and improve mobility...

More importantly that same larger vehicle could carry two Uragan pallets or two TOS pallets perhaps, but equally with a view to light artillery bombardment, remember that light truck vehicle model... imagine a version based on the Typhoon armoured truck designed to carry one pallet... it could be a universal rocket launcher able to carry one 122mm rocket pallet (25-30 rockets), or 220mm rocket pallet (15 rockets) or 300mm rocket pallets (6 rockets), but it could also carry the 220mm rocket pallet (15 rockets) filled with TOS instead of Uragan, or as a frontline assault vehicle you could put a 122mm or 80mm or 57mm aircraft rocket pod pallet on it, with maybe 50 x 122mm rocket tubes, 90-100 x 80mm rocket tubes, or 100-120 x 57mm rocket tubes for use against ground targets as a cheap simple attack vehicle.

The upgrades on the artillery vehicles means everything is automated... the crew remain in the cabin... find a location to stop... receive target data, which calculates everything for them... the missiles are pointed and elevated and on command fired and then they can raise their stability jacks and drive away... with local command the local commander might decide he is getting too much sniper fire from a building and call in artillery vehicle support... they might be 5km away, or they might be 35km away... a support vehicle with suitable on board ammo might respond so he gives them the coordinates and might even get a few forward vehicles with eyes on the target building to get ready to lase specific areas of the building to be hit... a nearby rocket vehicle might fire 4 or 5 rockets... they might be laser homing 80mm rockets with a solid rocket booster that extends their ballistic range to 25km, or they might just be firing them from 4km away, or they might be 122mm Grad rockets with Glonass guidance.

They might want specific warheads to be used so they might need 5 rockets from 4 different vehicles all located at different distances, with their launches synchronised based on rocket speed and their distance from the target and the number of laser target markers they have available at the time on the ground and in the air...

November 30, 10:47
Military operation in Ukraine

Shoigu: "Tornado-S" and "Malka" can effectively hit foreign systems in Ukraine

The head of the RF Ministry of Defense added that "counter-battery combat is being improved as one of the main tasks of fire destruction of the enemy"

MOSCOW, 30 November. /TASS/. The use of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) "Tornado-S" and self-propelled artillery mounts (SAU) "Malka" for the purposes of counter-battery combat during a special operation in Ukraine allows you to effectively hit foreign rocket and artillery systems. This was stated on Wednesday by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, General of the Army Sergei Shoigu, at the board of the military department.

"Counter-battery combat is being improved as one of the main tasks of fire destruction of the enemy. Long-range rocket artillery systems "Tornado-S" and high-powered artillery systems "Malka" are involved in its implementation. This makes it possible to effectively hit foreign rocket and artillery systems," he said.

Self-propelled gun 2S7M "Malka" is considered one of the most powerful and long-range in the world. This is a modernized version of the 2S7 Pion self-propelled gun, developed in the 1980s. The main purpose of the self-propelled guns is to defeat important enemy targets and objects in the tactical depth of defense behind the front line. The rate of fire of the gun is up to 2.5 rounds per minute, the range is about 50 km. The Russian Defense Ministry has repeatedly distributed footage from the special operation zone, in which Malka destroys American M777 howitzers.

The long-range 300-mm MLRS "Tornado-S" is a modified version of the "Smerch" system and can fire at targets at a distance of 120 km and cover an area of ​​more than 60 hectares. The complex is capable of firing both single rockets and a full volley of 12 guides.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/16461347

Article on Tornado-S

The maximum "capacity" of the existing brigades is 48 or 72 Tornado-S combat vehicles. If plans to reinforce 12 army artillery brigades with heavy MLRS divisions are implemented, the fleet of combat vehicles may increase to 96 or even 144 units. Prior to the start of the SVO, it was planned to replace the Tornadoes and Hurricanes with Tornado-S by the end of 2027.

https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/281041.html

There were only around 120 smerches in the entire russian army. Hopefully theyre also upgraded with digital FCS. its really inefficient to use these stupid tripod optics and pieces of paper.

Not enough Dakka clearly. Puny.
Looks like an export system. Sorry but that is how it looks to me.

What option is there if the domestic MAZ replacement was an utter failure, and MAZ chassis must be imported? Its either mount 6 tornado-S rockets on the domestically produced kamaz, or depend on belarus for MAZ chassis indefinitely.

It seems that Tornado-S and Tornado-G are not specific vehicles, but an electronics system upgrade that can be applied to existing vehicles that automate the firing and operations of the vehicles.

Where the old vehicles used to line up and get target information and perform calculations based on distance and direction of the target as well as weather conditions etc and then lower the firing jacks, elevate and point the tubes and then on command open fire and then move away to another location, the new systems seem to receive already processed target data, the crew stay in their vehicles, the vehicle presumably stops where ever is convenient and gets ready to fire without the crew leaving the cabin... on command they fire in their different locations on the same target and then move on while recon units monitor the attack with drones and determine if follow up attacks are required while the rocket vehicle moves to a safe location to reload the rockets.

The same upgrade would presumably be applied to their self propelled artillery vehicles too which would be rather interesting...

Russia is creating a new 300-mm MLRS "Sarma"??



A variant of the 9A52-4 combat vehicle of the 9K58-4 Kama multiple launch rocket system with a 300-mm MZ-196 launcher and a 9T234-4 transport-loading vehicle, made on the KamAZ-63501 (8x8) automobile chassis, during factory tests, 2010 (c) Motovilikhinskiye Zavody JSC


“Enterprises of the Russian military-industrial complex are developing a promising 300-millimeter MLRS Sarma, which will be a continuation of the Kama MLRS project, which was created on the KamAZ chassis. The new MLRS will have increased mobility and security and will be able, among other things, to use guided precision-guided munitions,” the source said.

He added that the car will be equipped with "an advanced automated fire control and guidance system."

From the side of bmpd, we recallthat the lightweight 300-mm MLRS 9K58-4 "Kama", using 300-mm rockets MLRS 9K58 "Smerch", but made on the automobile chassis KamAZ-6350 or KamAZ-63501 (8x8), was developed by SKB JSC "Motovilikhinskiye Zavody" ( Perm) in the 2000s. The first version of the combat vehicle 9A52-4 MLRS "Kama" was presented at the Moscow Aviation and Space Salon MAKS-2007 and was equipped with one unified quick-detachable transport and launch container 9Ya295 with six 300-mm rockets. The dimensions of the sealed container 9Ya295 are 7512 x 1130 x 996 mm, curb weight - 6.2 tons, empty - 1.42 tons. The total combat weight of the combat vehicle in this version was 23.6 tons. The crew of two people, the car on the march was disguised as a tent truck.

However, this machine MLRS "Kama" has not received development. The 9Y295 unified transport and launch containers with six 300-mm missile guides were also used on the 9A53 combat vehicle of the 9K512 Uragan-1M bicaliber (220 and 300 mm) MLRS, which was formally put into service in 2016, but has so far remained in piece copies .

At the REA-2009 arms exhibition in Nizhny Tagil (Sverdlovsk region), a new version of the 9A52-4 Kama MLRS combat vehicle was demonstrated, now equipped with a rotary 300-mm six-shot tubular launcher MZ-196 instead of the 9Ya295 transport and launch container. Accordingly, a special transport-loading vehicle (TZM) 9T234-4 was introduced into the MLRS, carrying six 300 mm caliber missiles and also made on the KamAZ-63501 (8x8) chassis. Tests of prototypes of the Kama MLRS in this version were carried out for several years, but were eventually discontinued due to lack of interest from the Russian Ministry of Defense, which decided to acquire a modernized version of the Smerch MLRS performed by 9K515 Tornado-S.

The reasons for the current reincarnation of the Kama MLRS in a “new look” and with guided missiles are quite obvious and are well described by Stalin’s legendary phrase addressed to the aircraft designer A.N. Tupolev about copying the American B-29 bomber: "Don't do it better, do it!".

Sarma is a river flowing into Baikal and a strong Baikal wind.


The first version of the 9A52-4 combat vehicle of the 9K58-4 Kama multiple launch rocket system equipped with one unified quick-detachable transport and launch container 9Ya295 with six 300-mm rockets, on display at the Moscow Aviation and Space Salon MAKS-2007. Zhukovsky, August 2007 (c) Gurov S.V. Unified quick-detachable transport and launch container 9Ya295 with six 300-mm rockets (s) Gurov S.V.

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4708599.html

Use a BAZ-6909 8x8 high mobility truck

That is the truck used by the 2S43 gun.

GarryB wrote:

Use a BAZ-6909 8x8 high mobility truck

That is the truck used by the 2S43 gun.

I hope they use the BAZ-6909 for the wheeled Koalitsiya-SV instead of the Kamaz truck they're currently experimenting with.

The point is to make the launcher as cheap as possible. Kamaz trucks serve as the backbone of Russian wheeled overland logistics so it makes perfect sense to piggyback on the commonality in parts and services and end up with a launcher that is both cheap to buy and operate.

Why does Russia need a HIMARS?

The simple reason is that it doesn't because the reasons for it don't make sense to the Soviet or Russian Army.

HIMARS is a light cheap mobile version of the M270, which is their original MLRS vehicle.

It is based on the Bradley BMP chassis and is expensive to buy and operate for HATO partners who don't also operate the Bradley BMP because it adds a new vehicle to their inventory with a new engine and new wheels and new transmission and components and tracks that are not standard on any of their other vehicles.

For the US the Bradley is already in service and they have support and logistics set up for the vehicle so putting rockets on the back was their decision... they were going to take cheap simple rocket artillery that the Soviets had and make it expensive.

The M270 was expensive... expensive to buy and expensive to operate and not more effective or more powerful or more accurate than its direct Soviet equivalent, the Uragan. The M270 is 227mm calibre rockets and Uragan is 220mm rockets... the Uragan has 16 tubes vs 12 for MLRS and range performance is better all round, except for ATACMS, which is a role in the Soviet Army performed by Tochka and Iskander missiles.

Uragan, being truck based is faster and much cheaper to buy and operate and can be used in large numbers cheaply, which is always the best way to use rocket artillery... in large numbers.

The US realised the M270 was expensive and could not be used in large numbers without being expensive so they developed the lighter cheaper HIMARS with the lower costs of a truck compared with the costs of a track layer vehicle.

It is probably not much cheaper than Smerch... in fact it probably isn't cheaper and it likely isn't more mobile than any of the Soviet rocket vehicles... the Grad at 122mm, the Uragan at 220mm and the Smerch at 300mm.

Claiming the HIMARS is easier to hide... it is a similar size to Grad vehicles... Soviet forces had a special forces single rocket launcher tube version in 122mm calibre that could be left behind... it was disposable... and multiple rockets would be set up by separate teams to all point at the same target and be launched at once...

Much better than HIMARS.

The only HIMARS type the Russians have shown is this:

http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/land-forces/missile-systems-multiple-rocket-launchers-mrl-atgm-systems-and-field-artillery-guns/smerch-s-bm-9a52-4/

Which probably appeals to export customers more than the Russian military whose other types already cover such roles and are not overly expensive.

Edit: Ironically the HIMARS seems to be used as a single rocket surgical strike weapon to hit precision targets, so the actual equivalent in the Russian arsenal would be the new HERMES with a 6 tube launcher on the back of a truck intended to hit point targets out to 100km or so and is being delayed from entering service so its missile can be upgraded to be powered all the way to the target to allow evasive manouvering to avoid interception.

The HIMARS rockets get shot down all the time so HERMES is a better HIMARS with longer range and will be able to hit targets through defences that would stop HIMARS rockets... like the Russian air defences do.

That would have the critical advantage that HERMES could be used to destroy military targets... including air defence systems most important of all, instead of being used against unprotected civilian targets like HIMARS.

The difference is HIMARS is modular. It can either use GMLRS rockets or ATACMS ballistic missiles.

I don't rate that distinction as relevant.

Both options the US currently use can be shot down, while the Tochka is not as capable as the Iskander and can be shot down, the Iskander seems to be rather difficult if not impossible to shoot down for the moment, which is a critical distinction.

Russia can shoot down HIMARS and ATACMS and GMLRS and everything else the US has... not all the time of course and the Orcs manage to get hits by firing at civilian targets that are not protected like military targets... which essentially makes them terror weapons... weapons to piss the enemy off.

You can also reload the unit by replacing the whole module in one go, instead of reloading the rockets in the unit one by one.

The pod loading of HIMARS is also overrated too unless those pods can be pre loaded with suitable mixes of rocket types... which they obviously can't because you don't know what you need to fire till you know what the target is and what the situation currently is.

There are dozens of different rocket types that are suitable for different targets but not just any target, so the right rocket type for the right target is important.

Just like rockets in aircraft carried rocket pods you can have a mix of rocket types and select those types for launch at specific targets... anti armour, HE Frag, submunition of various types...

Equally when operating rocket artillery you don't roll around empty and find a target and park and load a rocket pod and then fire and then load another rocket pod and fire and then keep loading and keep firing...

Once you fire there are big long smoke trails pointing to exactly where you are so you can't reload... even if it only takes 3 minutes... you have to move... and you can't reload a pod while you are moving.

When you get to a safe place... if there is such a thing then you can take all the time you need to reload and you can reload the rocket types you might want for a different target or a follow up attack.

Even with a pod you get a target you launch your rockets and then you move and the place you move to is where you reload to fire again... being able to reload in 3 minutes is no advantage and worse if you need to load specific rocket types for a specific target then you need that specific pod with those rockets in it.

Hand loading rockets is not so fast but you can load the rockets you need.

Rocket artillery remains best use for area targets rather than point targets... Smerch and Uragan and Grad and the new Tornados are machine guns. Iskander and Hermes are sniper rifles.

Plus the latest generation GMLRS rockets have more range and are guided, unlike Uragan. The original Uragan vehicle is also obsolete and out of production at this point.

In the 1980s when the M270 was new everyone ignored the fact that the Uragan was superior by many parameters to the M270 everyone was so excited about.

There is nothing particularly special about HIMARS though since there are several systems like this which predate it. One example is Brazil's ASTROS MLRS. Israel, Turkey, among other countries also have similar systems.

HIMARS is evidence that M270 was too expensive for the US and especially her HATO allies.

Performance was not amazing and the cost of introducing a Bradley BMP chassis and all that entails into their logistics just to get a rocket artillery vehicle you could easily put on a cheap truck like HIMARS shows the US MIC are greedy.

The thing is Russia has more Smerch and Tornado-S systems than Ukraine has HIMARS systems, and those Russian systems use larger 300mm rockets and can carry more of them, plus there are guided variants of these. So it is not like Russia is lacking in artillery or something. They need to continue deliveries of Tornado-S systems, develop more advanced long range rockets for it, and they can take their time developing a proper replacement for the Uragan.

If the news above about Sarma is right it seems that they are introducing the heavier of the two vehicles that carries two pod mounted launchers.

In the case of the Russian inventory that would mean it could carry a 6 tube pod of 300mm and a 15 tube pod of 220mm rockets for targets that are not so far away but need better coverage of HE fragmentation.

The Grad actually has more sensor fused top attack munitions than Smerch... Smerch has 12 rockets with 5 munitions per rocket, so 60 in total per volley out to 120km range or so, while Grad has two munitions per rocket to 30km range, but with 40 rockets it has 80 munitions...

The Grad truck is smaller lighter more mobile and cheaper so getting it 30km from an enemy staging area for armour would not be impossible... it would be way more potent than any 6 rockets from a HIMARS vehicle that likely costs rather more.

Improved range is always good, but they shouldn't fall into the same trap the US is falling in to... when the enemy bunches up for a counter offensive having tiny numbers of HIMARS vehicles scattered around the place is not as good as hundreds of Grads et al launching enormous numbers of cheap and effective rockets that are accurate enough.

Machine gun and not sniper rifle.

The Hermes and Lmur and lots of other weapons including Lancets etc can be the sniper rifle.

lancelot wrote:
The difference is HIMARS is modular. It can either use GMLRS rockets or ATACMS ballistic missiles. You can also reload the unit by replacing the whole module in one go, instead of reloading the rockets in the unit one by one. Plus the latest generation GMLRS rockets have more range and are guided, unlike Uragan. The original Uragan vehicle is also obsolete and out of production at this point. There is nothing particularly special about HIMARS though since there are several systems like this which predate it. One example is Brazil's ASTROS MLRS. Israel, Turkey, among other countries also have similar systems.

The difference is Iskander is nuclear capable. Iskander brigades are subject to strict nuclear weapons handling procedures and have a greater allocation of force protection measures than just about most units in the Russian Army as a consequence.

If you are going to go the extra mile to have deployable nuclear warheads on call, basing them in their own trucks wouldn't even make that much of a dent.

It is interesting though that HIMARS and ATACMS exist in a military force that is so air power centred, but equally interesting that in a real conflict with say Ukraine that the west would probably have resorted to using Army weapons instead of losing A-10s and F-16 pilots to Ukrainian air defence...

They wouldn't send ground forces into the conflict in Kosovo but equally they wouldn't send helicopters either...

If they had tried Desert Storm with their hands tied like that they would have found they didn't have enough HIMARS or M270s etc etc. because they want to use it like a sniper system when it is much more efficient as a machine gun.

I don't get this brainrot that somehow the guided "rockets" (the correct term is missile) of the Polonez or similar Chinese MLRS are so much cheaper than the Iskander.

Nigga, precision is expensive, and doubly so when you have a smaller warhead in tow because you have to be even more precise to deliver the same effects.


Like holy shit this thing is just a smaller Iskander down to the quasi-ballistic trajectory. And you think its going to be cheaper?

But of course, it will be.
It lacks penetration means, has a much less complicated warhead, less expensive engine, and obviously simplified correction/guidance. It does not maneuver.
Today, electronics are a margin cost. Seriously just lurke into Aliexpress to check how the prices for GPS devices dropped. A drone costing $400 has everything that is needed to construct a cruise missile with own collision avoidance systems, capable to fly just above ground level with a trajectory unable to predict. A car cam recorder for $200 can recognize, select, follow, and prioritize targets - those are obstacles, cars and pedestrians, but it is only a matter of software. It can do the same for the targeting system.
I seriously see an existing gap with Russian ordnance forcing them to use overkill systems. They are attacking Odessa/Nikolayev based targets with Ch-101, for Gods sake... It is 150 km straight line ...
They seriously need a sub-500 km systems. MLRS artillery would be perfect.