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

SPBE-D weighs 14,5k. warhead 1kg. After detection of the target the warhead accelerates to 3000m/s. It can penetrate 100mm RHA.

Thanks for the info. There was a good video on YouTube showing you how it worked I thought it was excellent idea and yet as far as I know the west doesn't have such a missile. So a full salvo over a wide area of encroaching enemy IFV's could be very effective and horrendous for the enemy as no real way of avoiding it and likely won't even realise what's happening might even think they have escaped any damage then suddenly bam their hit.

The west got something like it. The CBU-97B SFW. Or CBU-105 with the WCMD (corrects wind drift). They got 10 BLU-108 bomblets, each with 4 Skeet-warheads. Is like the SPBE.

Yes, there is a western equivalent... I think it is MMW radar only and does not have an IR channel.

In the 1980s there was a series of magazines that you bought to make an encyclopaedia of military equipment and it described these skeet weapons and suggested that by the 1990s the US would have awesome anti armour capabilities... which it said was just as well because of how much armour the Soviets had....

Of course at that stage they didn't know half of what the Soviets even had then... that set did not mention the AT-7 or AT-13 and didn't know Kornet was coming...

There is also a missile for the MRLS, that got this submunitions. Don´t know the name.

The new SPBE-K even got a IFF system.

Did I read that right that these missiles are only 20km while old grad was 40km or is that only for certain types?

Also any news if there will be a tracked version?
I always thought a BM-21 would have been quite useful mounted on a MT-LB giving increased mobility and armour protection. Could possibly even mount it on a bmp-1/2/3 or BTR-60/70/80. Would be useful for artic conditions. I've seen BM-14 mounted on a MT-LB and T-54/55.

Rockets are heavier = more BUMM.

The original Grad 122mm rockets had a range of 20km.

The upgraded Grad rockets had extended range to 30-40km depending on the model and they had improved warheads.

These new rockets have further improved warheads and have their range reduced to 20km again.

The Israeli copy of the Grad also has slightly heavier warheads and shorter range than the originals they copied.

The Israelis recognised how useful Grads are, and improved their performance with heavier warheads at the cost of slightly shorter range.

Having enormous range is nice, but if your operational unit can't get target data on targets 50 or 100km away then there is no reason to launch rockets against targets that likely can't see you either.

It is better to hit that enemy unit 20km away that is firing at you than that enemy unit 40km away that doesn't even know you are there.

Remember they have Uragan (40km range with standard original rockets), and Smerch (70km and then 90km range with standard rockets) that would be used for any counter battery fire roles... new versions of which will likely include rockets with the same range and much better warheads, but also rockets with much better range for the counter battery role.... and likely equipped with a UAV support unit to find targets at those ranges...

I always thought a BM-21 would have been quite useful mounted on a MT-LB giving increased mobility and armour protection.

The virtue of rocket artillery is its range and its ability to deliver enormous concentrations of HE and Frags and indeed anti armour munitions over a fairly large area very very rapidly.

Its range means it does not have to operate on or near a front line, while its wheeled chassis means it is highly mobile on roads and very cheap to operate in significant numbers.

Making it armoured makes it more expensive and actually slower, yet no level of armour would make it actually safe.

Lets face it... compare the Uragan to the US MLRS... the former is mounted on a truck already widely used in the eastern block and has 16 220mm calibre rockets with ranges of about 40km.

The MLRS is mounted on a modified Bradley IFV chassis not used by any other NATO partner, and has 12 rockets with ranges of about 40km.

You could probably get and operate 10 Uragans for the price of one Bradley based MLRS, and in terms of fire power, yet the Soviet vehicle carries more rockets, is vastly more mobile on roads...

Even if you compare the Grad with the 40km ranged upgraded rockets... the Grad is much lighter and cheaper and has 40km range rockets... 40 of them...

As mentioned even the Israelis use a copy... it is a good solid capable system... and new upgrades only make it better..

Could possibly even mount it on a bmp-1/2/3 or BTR-60/70/80. Would be useful for artic conditions. I've seen BM-14 mounted on a MT-LB and T-54/55.

I have seen a lot of Chinese APCs and IFVs with rocket tubes mounted on them... I think in that case their use would be different however.

Much like the 80mm rocket pod packs they have developed for helos as shown in the back of utes (I believe Americans call them pickup trucks).... mounted on an IFV or APC they would not be used as artillery... they might be used as an anti ambush weapon in the direct fire role, or to take on lots of enemy infantry... also likely in a direct fire role.

During WWII several tanks had unguided artillery rocket mounts on them to support operations in some cases... they never actually used them as indirect fire artillery.

Of course with the computerisation and new accurate guided shells cheap enough to use as standard rounds (ie Glonass guided shells as used by Coalition etc), then using 2S1 or 2S3 vehicles roaming around the battlefield able to deliver shells accurately from wherever they are on target... would be especially useful somewhere like Syria where defined front lines simply don't really exist... these mobile fire support vehicles would be potent little gun packages... with an IFV or perhaps a few BMPTs to support them... when fire support is needed the unit in trouble can look up the location of the nearest fire support unit and call in coordinates for them to shell the problems and make them go away... that should work with tube artillery and rocket artillery... though the latter would be less accurate... the shorter range of 20km for these rockets should improve accuracy too.

My understanding is that Russian rockets, while not actually guided, have gyro stabilisation systems that stabilise the flight and prevents rounds flying off in random directions. They don't make them more precise on target on their own, but keeps the volley of rockets closer together so wind or other factors effect their deviation from point of aim less.

Thanks GarryB for the info and input. I knew of course about cheap quick mobility of wheeled mount and shoot and scoot tactics. Being armoured yes would have only limited protection. Being tracked would of course allow it to operate in any terrain and it would of course depend on that if you needed such chassis. Obviously if there ever was an artic version I'd expect a tracked chassis and I suppose if the need was ever needed Russia could easily mount it on such very quickly.

Agreed on the range just because something has a maximum range doesn't they will always operate at their maximum in fact it likely never does in combat because war doesn't always work like that.

The grad is a great weapon and hence the west were keen to get them into terrorists hands in syria and that the SAA was very keen to eliminate such items in terrorists hands. Yet it's surprising that the west hasn't built there own system. Probably because it's not sexy and sophisticated and highly expensive and that's its a Russian creation lol. I knew that when I was in the forces they were very much feared a weapon that the Russians had because of the speed, firepower, range, and the sheer number they could field as well as the ease of being able to conceal them as simple trucks. There cheap and cheap munitions and once missiles are airborne no air defence system is going to be able to shoot down all missiles of a full salvo.

The MLRS in British service was normally requested by troops on the ground but rarely the request was met. They were very selected probably down to the number fielded and cost of missiles which often meant troops went without fire support. Most of the time we only ever had battalion fire support available to us which was 81mm mortar the guys were good and very accurate but as you know lacks the firepower of something heavier like 120mm mortar. But still useful against troops and soft skinned vehicles. We would have loved to have had grad type system. The grad is a sort of step between nothing and MLRS the usa and uk are missing.

George1 wrote:Russia’s new rocket-launched drone to pierce air defenses more easily — expert

MOSCOW, September 30. /TASS/. Russia’s new drone, to be launched atop projectiles of the Smerch multiple launch rocket system, will be able to pierce the adversary’s air defenses more easily, Russia’s expert on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), Denis Fedutinov, has told TASS.

Russia’s Tecmash defense enterprise, which specializes in development and production of ammunition for the Russian armed forces, announced on Saturday that it started flight tests of a new UAV, propelled by Smerch rockets. The drone, which replaces the rocket’s warhead, can cover the distance of up 90 kilometers atop the rocket, then separate from it and continue its flight independently.

"The main advantage of such a drone as compared to other low-speed UAVs is the higher chance of penetrating the adversary’s air defense systems. The drone will cross antimissile barriers inside a projectile of the multiple launch rocket system, which, due to its speed on one hand the possibility of being launched in a salvo of ordinary projectiles on the other, will make it a difficult target for missile defense systems," Fedutinov said.

He said the main task of those UAVs will be to conduct aerial survey of ground targets within the range of multiple launch rocket systems.


More:
http://tass.com/defense/1023681

The revival of the ENICS T-90 ?

Yes, they have been promising this for some time... a little disappointing that they haven't completed development yet to make an actual operational system.

More than a little ironic because it was the artillery part of the military that actually paid more than just lip service to UAVs in Soviet times with the Bumblebee being the only operational UAV system in Soviet regular use...

The grad is a sort of step between nothing and MLRS the usa and uk are missing.

I suspect the problem is precision.

You can't fire a single rocket and hit a point target with it at range.

The other aspect is that the individual munitions would be cheap and simple and could be made in enormous numbers, while the launch platforms are relatively simple and cheap too... and truck the right size would do, so the potential for profit is not really that good...

It seems that NATO has no area targets and always knows precisely where all of its targets are located, so having a weapon that flattens a large area in a way that makes sure anything there gets hurt bad even if you can't actually see it from the launch area is interesting.

I know the UK army prides itself on precision rifle fire even from infantry but I have seen plenty of video footage of western troops... not just British... just pointing their rifle in a general direction and firing long bursts not really sure what or where the target actually is...

That is suppressive fire... I appreciate that is normal... I also remember CNN news docos about Afghanistan showing Soviets firing like that too, and of course criticism of the failure of the Soviets to take villages... normally they resort to artillery or air power to destroy the problem... which is exactly what we seem to see NATO doing today in places like Afghanistan.

Certainly some sort of direct fire weapon with a range of 1.5-2km or so like an upgraded SPG-9 would be valuable even today, not to mention rocket artillery and indeed 120mm mortar support.

Regarding these flamethrowers... originally they were intended to clear minefields as the blast wave from the thermobaric rounds lasts longer than with HE detonations and is more effective in setting off mines, but also has the benefit of using up oxygen in tunnels and bunkers because as it burns it consumes the oxygen in the air to do so...

The drone built into the MLRS Smerch missile has been tested

The first samples of the drone are likely to be sold abroad, since Russia has already identified "structures that ensure the use of drones in the interests of the army."

The press service of the concern "Tehmash" stated that work on the creation and testing of the UAV launched in the projectile of the Smerch multiple rocket launcher is in the final stage.

As the General Designer of the Splav Research and Production Association Nikolay Makarovets said earlier, the UAV was developed, which is launched in the Smerch rocket launcher. According to him, the first customer is likely to become a foreign buyer, as in the Russian Federation "structures were identified that ensure the use of UAVs in the interests of the army."

Recall, the MLRS "Smerch" is a 300-mm caliber Russian rocket launcher system designed to destroy personnel, armored vehicles, as well as artillery and mortar batteries and other targets.

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201811270752-468a.htm

The delivery time of the drone to the target area is about 150 seconds.

The MLRS "Smerch" UAV was created according to the aircraft scheme. Its main tasks are to determine wind parameters in the target area, transfer data on the recognition of reconnaissance objects with their coordinates to the command and staff vehicle, and conduct shooting results in real time mode.

The information provided to the drone reported that the time spent in the air drone is up to half an hour, the mass of the payload - 7 pounds.

The speed of the UAV is about 100 kilometers per hour, the maximum height is 3000 meters.

Picture of the thing






The UAV is equipped with a TV and an IR camera, the resolution of the observed surface with a flight height of 500 m is at least 0.5 m in the center and 0.7 m at the edges

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201811271118-1myj.htm

Pretty much the same model they have been showing for 15 years...

GarryB wrote:Pretty much the same model they have been showing for 15 years...

Yeah, they've had that thing close to 2 decades, why is now only being tested? Perhaps journalistic folly.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

GarryB wrote:Pretty much the same model they have been showing for 15 years...

Yeah, they've had that thing close to 2 decades, why is now only being tested? Perhaps journalistic folly.

concept was last 20 years but this one is IMHO updated implementation. Finally they got resources to implement that it.

George1 wrote:

Hole wrote:

where did u find it?

Probably on the Otvaga forums.

On a secret source called Internet.