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

But of course it was not, when Tochka was fielded nobody even considered the potential applied to Iskander.
You probably think about Oka, yet it was not even close to Iskander. It can be redirect en route by new coordinates, and home on moving target on approach using optical head. Oka lacked both, there was no technical space for that by the time.

And there you go telling me what I think...

They found themselves with two missiles with the same warheads and same seekers... one had a longer flight range and was better at evading air defences, but both were essentially the same.

The cost and price was not radically different but the costs of having two missile systems doing essentially the same thing was something they decided they didn't need.

They decided the Tochka could be retired and the Iskander could take over the role of both missiles.

The HERMES is going to have a range of 100-200km but will be much smaller and cheaper and be able to defeat point targets including moving targets... the descriptions talk about payloads of 30kgs or 60kgs depending on the iteration... the ballistic version with a solid rocket booster that glides down to the target is supposed to have a 57kg warhead and terminal homing, but they seem to have decided that would be too easy to shoot down and that a powered version with a 30kg warhead and a propulsion system to manouver and maintain speed makes more sense yet will be a fraction of the cost of the almost 4 ton Iskander.

A ramjet assisted missile might extend effective range to 300km plus in a missile that can be mounted on a relatively light truck:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Nickel_nitride



A SAM dodging manouvering ramjet powered HERMES is going to be rather more effective at hitting point targets at 100km plus ranges than any 300mm dumb rocket with terminal guidance.

GarryB wrote:

And there you go telling me what I think...

The only thing I am trying to do, is to figure out some reasonable cause for you claiming the thing you'd do.
Otherwise,it is only you being stuck to some nonsense.

Tochka and Iskander represent a different tiers of ballistic missiles systems.
While Tochka is a replacement for Frog/Luna, Iskander represents Elbrus younger generation.
Those share perfectly nothing, and are assigned to a different operational command, to begin with.

Tochka uses 9M123 warhead of different types/prefixes. It is ballistic missile with no homing other than inertial navigation for U version, bringing the accuracy to some 70m. There is antiradar version, too, with a passive radar homing and a shrapnel warhead. Warhead weight is 420 kg.

Iskander uses 9N722 warhead of different types/prefixes. It is quasi-ballistic missile with optronic homing at terminal stage, capable of being redirected en route, and hit a moving targets with some 2m accuracy. There is an active radar homing warhead option tested for more than 15 years, with some low level distribution, too. Warhead weight is 480 kg.

There is no point for further arguing.

Tochka and Iskander represent a different tiers of ballistic missiles systems.

Not different enough to matter, they had two systems essentially doing the same thing and got rid of one system and used the other in its place.

While Tochka is a replacement for Frog/Luna, Iskander represents Elbrus younger generation.
Those share perfectly nothing, and are assigned to a different operational command, to begin with.

They are out of Russian service and are not being used by the Russians.

The Iskander remains in use.

Is it a criminal offense to suggest that one system is doing the job the two used to do?

They used them in Georgia so they know their combat performance...

Tochka uses 9M123 warhead of different types/prefixes.

The export catalogue for Russias Arms lists both missiles as having a payload of 480kgs, so of course it makes sense for them to reduce any heavier payload below the 500kg export limit but why add 60kgs for the export version of Tochka?

It is ballistic missile with no homing other than inertial navigation for U version, bringing the accuracy to some 70m.

And for the Iskander there are inertial guided models too with no terminal guidance... plus a version with radar guidance and also a version with an optical seeker too.

The optical seeker itself is described as being for ballistic tactical and theatre missiles, but if only Iskander uses it why describe it as a system for ballistic missiles?

There is no point for further arguing.

Who is arguing?

You claim Russia needs its artillery rockets to do counterbattery and strike missions out to 500km and I am saying that sort of mission does not need a multiple rocket launcher and a new smaller lighter powered missile could hit such point targets much more efficiently and cheaply... even mentioned the name of the system a couple of times.

If you need to hit a target 500km away with a 500kg warhead then they already have Iskander... if the problem is western long range artillery vehicles then Hermes is all you need.

Powered versions that manouver to reach the target will ensure targets are destroyed, perhaps cheaper unpowered models could be used against enemies with weak air defences or against targets that don't have air defence.

The point I am trying to make is that Smerch and Uragan and Grad already do their job well and the requirement to have them do this from 200km plus will just make them too expensive to use most of the time.

These Chinese and Belarussian rockets don't fly further because they are super high tech... they fly further because they carry more rocket fuel and less payload and the guidance systems needed to hit point targets means they wont be that cheap anyway.

China and Belarus have long range unguided rockets because they don't have Iskander.

Many targets don't require such a missile but that is what HERMES is going to be for... and the new model for ground launch will be interesting because the powered second stage launched version from an aircraft would be rather interesting too...

Su-25TM carrying two pylons carrying four HERMES missiles each with solid rocket boosters and unpowered missiles could hit targets out to 20-30km, but with the powered missile stage they should be able to reach more than double that if lofted into the air and equipped with ramjets...

At the very least an anti radiation version with a ramjet motor and solid rocket booster would be useful for strike aircraft like the Su-34.

I'm seeing a lot of people misidentify Grad and Tornado-G so here's a pro-tip:
Look for the rocket blast deflectors on the muzzle end of the launch tubes.

They're there to protect the fragile rocket interfacing docks on each tube - the one with wires running to another box on the bottom of the launcher.
Grad doesn't have those so the launch tube doesn't have the blast deflectors either.

As to why the Tornado-G rockets need a direct datalink

The idea of the submunition is to spread lethal fragments over a wide area to make the chance of inflicting injuries on soft targets spread around the battlefield much higher.

For them to be effective they have to be cheap enough to use in enormous numbers, but if you want to put a camera or sensor in each one to find a specific target then they are going to cost a lot more and also not really cover the ground as effectively so targets it can't see will be safe.

The anti tank guided top attack submunitions make sense because HE frag bomblets would not be very effective against armoured targets so you need to find such valuable targets and hit them individually so extra expense and complication makes it worth while.

They have HEAT top attack submunition rounds to which just carry small 2.5kg bomblets that will punch holes in the tops of things, whether it is just the ground or a bunker or building or a tank it does not care... so to get a good chance of kills they pack lots of munitions in each round.

To give you an example, the Smerch artillery rockets in 2004 were offered for export with these options. First the 9N150, which has a single 95kg HE frag warhead. The 9N139 is the cluster warhead model with 72 munitions in each rocket with HE Frag munitions that are scattered around the point of aim. The 9N152 is the sensor fused self forging fragment top attack anti tank rocket with 5 submunitions per rocket. The 9N539 has anti armour mines, and carries 25 per rocket, the 9N174 carries a single 100kg thermobaric HE warhead, and lastly the 9N176 which has shaped charge top attack bomblets designed to penetrate top armour of vehicles but also has a fragmentation effect to damage things around it too and it carries 616 bomblets per rocket...

As you can probably imagine, 616 bomblets that are HE Frag and can punch through the top of a tanks turret from each rocket fired is going to cover quite an area in fragments... I honestly don't think developing something that seeks out targets would be needed, unless you mean something that can chase people into buildings and kill them...

the launch system can carry more 220mm rockets i.e. 16 vs 12.

The old Uragan truck carried 16 rockets ready to fire... Smerch carries 12.



Two rows of six and one row of four...

Still leaves the problem of automation of the whole complex, and making new longer range modern 220mm rockets for the Uragan. But I guess this goes partly towards the objective of making a modern counterpart to the Western HIMARS launchers.

Russia does not need a HIMARS type launcher, it is the west that needed one because their first rocket vehicle was based on the Bradley BMP chassis, which is expensive and not widely used within HATO, which made it even more expensive for other HATO countries.

Smerch is probably cheaper than HIMARS and better in every regard.

For light weight then there is no way HIMARs comes close to Grad.

The only thing the Russians are working on similar to HIMARS would be HERMES, and I rather suspect it is still cheaper despite using guided missiles.

Still leaves the problem of automation of the whole complex, and making new longer range modern 220mm rockets for the Uragan. But I guess this goes partly towards the objective of making a modern counterpart to the Western HIMARS launchers.

Did you not read francos post... they are cutting the Uragan 220mm rocket for Smerch and Grad.

I wonder if that will effect TOS or will 220 Uragan production shift to making TOS rockets or 300mm Smerch or 122mm Grad rockets...

As interesting as Smerch is, the larger 300mm rockets will be harder to move logistically, and the launch vehicle for the standard system is made in Belarus at MZKT. That means you can't just replace the Uragan with Smerch.

Why? Neither 220mm nor 300mm rockets can be hand loaded so I rather doubt the logistics difference is enormous, but the range and payload advantage of Smerch is significant so why keep making the smaller rocket.

If the Uragan is lighter and more mobile then 122mm Grad will be lighter still and even more mobile.

the Smerch rockets carry 5 self forging guided top attack munitions per rocket which means one vehicle can launch 60 munitions, but the Grad carries two munitions per rocket so it can launch 80 submunitions from one vehicle.

Sometimes heavier warheads are important and other times the area you spread them is more important... with Grad and Smerch you have both areas covered.... leave 220mm to TOS and TOS-2.

I was talking about the Uragan on the BAZ truck vs Uragan-1M on MZKT truck.

Is that Uragan or is that Smerch?

The Pod rockets for 220mm seem to carry 15 rockets rather than 6...

I know it is just a model, but it shows the length and size difference of the two pods...

After thinking about it for a bit I would say stopping production of Uragan makes sense because Smerch has better range and payload and Grad is lighter and cheaper and more mobile with more ready to fire rockets.

220mm rocket production will continue only with TOS I suspect.

I don't understand, if they're dumping 220mm rockets why are they showing off old Uragan launchers on new BAZ trucks?

Well they did say they were gradually scaling back production of Uragan till there are only two calibres left (Presumably 122mm and 300mm).

lancelot wrote:
Sure. But that is only because they haven't upgraded the 220mm rockets to use the new propellant and composite casing like they did with 122mm ones. Just look at the range of similar diameter US GMLRS rockets for example.

You do all that you'd still end up with rockets inferior to the 300mm rockets of the Tornado-S in range and payload. What's the point?

Sure. But that is only because they haven't upgraded the 220mm rockets to use the new propellant and composite casing like they did with 122mm ones. Just look at the range of similar diameter US GMLRS rockets for example.

It would cost money to upgrade the 220mm rockets, and they have already spent money upgrading the 122mm and 300mm rockets, but it really does not make sense to upgrade the 220mm rockets as well because they are in the middle and don't really have a capability that makes them necessary.

That truck model I posted shows they could have a 6 tube pallet of 300mm rockets together with a 15 tube pallet with 220mm rockets if they wanted to, but I suspect they think making three different rocket types for three different pallet types for their new rocket launcher trucks is a bit redundant and that simply making more 122mm and 300mm rockets makes more sense financially.

It also means they only have to make two types of pallet too.

US GMLRS is just a guided missile, which is not really a rocket launcher, it is a way for the US MIC to make a machine gun as expensive as a sniper rifle.

Hermes will achieve what HIMARS achieves on a smaller lighter cheaper platform.

Personally I'm surprised Uragan-1M (damn confusing name) hasn't entered wider service yet.

Yeah, it is like they are trying to be pricks... we have three systems so lets make that two systems, one of which has the same name and appears to be the same... but the other vehicle is named after the system we are gradually going to phase out but it carries the rockets of the third system... so we have the old Grad and Uragan and Smerch and the new Tornado-G and Tornado-S which both look sort of the same as the Grad and Smerch but we are also shown Uragan-M1 with a new truck and pallet rocket pods that appear to be Smerch rockets and Uragan rockets.

You do all that you'd still end up with rockets inferior to the 300mm rockets of the Tornado-S in range and payload. What's the point?

Which is why their decision makes sense.

It is a bit like asking why they use 82mm and 120mm and 240mm mortars but not 160mm mortars, well the 82mm and 120mm are small and light enough to be man or vehicle portable and the rounds can be hand loaded easily enough. The 160mm mortar is a heavy piece and its 40kg bombs are difficult to manhandle.

You could argue that the 240mm is even heavier and its 130kg rounds are even worse, but the 130kg rounds are more effective than the 40kg rounds of the 160mm which is similar in power but not range to 152mm gun rounds.

Keeping 160mm mortars in storage and using 240mm mortars makes a similar sense.

Not to say Uragan rockets or 160mm mortars are bad, but smaller and heavier weapons can do a better job in different situations.