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

Belarus is a safe supply chain node for Russia's MIC. Fucking place is locked up tight by Wagner Russian SF and Poland and the Baltics are on notice that if they try anything funny Luka's kneejerk response will ram an Iskander tac nuke up their ass faster than they can say Article 5.

After seeing what happens to Ukraine (the level of abandonment by the west and the level of rebuilding by Russia) I would think that most of the population of Belarus will realise being a separate country is not all it is cracked up to be and that perhaps joining the Russian Federation as a region would be their best option moving forward.

But I can't really speak for them obviously, but the way the west has used countries as a battering ram and cannon fodder to damage Russia is honestly disgusting, American values of truth and justice don't even come in to it... they were thrown under the bus... in fact they were fattened up and dipped in a nice hot spicy dipping sauce and then thrown into the bear cage at the zoo after leaving the bears without food for long enough to make them very hungry and very angry but not long enough to weaken them in any way.

Well possibly the high vehicles price is just a way for Russia to subsidize Bielorussia.

When the various Belarusian regions will be fully back inside the russian federation hat can be corrected and Money can be Better organised (including possibly the building of new plants for civilian aircraft maintenance, possibly for su-25 production, etc and also civilian car production.

Furthermore  at that time the various belorussian firms like MZKT can be better integrated into the Russian production.

Vympel wrote:The risk is mainly in the succession after Luka goes, but yes

There will be no succession to Lukashenko. Either Bielorussia is properly integrated into the Russian federation (not as Bielorussia, but as separate oblasts+ Minsk as a federal city (Like Moscow, Sankt Petersburg, Sevastopol (and soon Kiev)) while Luka is given a nice sinecure position or some other prestigious role in the Security Council of the Russian Federation to keep him happy, or there will be a Bielorussian maidan and Russia will have to repeat the SMO there.

This must be made clear also to the Bielorussian citizens. A neutral approach (or also Bielorussia as independent ally) is not possible anymore.

Furthermore Bielorussia has no independent economy and at the moment is a cost for Russia.
Properly integrating it inside the RF will allow a better management of money and remove the risk of a coup d'etat.

Like I said, the Grad is outranged by modern long range GPS guided artillery even when modernized, and the Smerch is just too expensive to use in large enough numbers.

Smerch is not expensive.

Uragan is in the middle not offering anything special... Grad is cheaper and easier to produce in large numbers and for the battlefield role of hitting targets like an artillery rocket is supposed to it is rather good. Smerch is heavier and has much longer range than the Uragan could be adapted or upgraded to have and with a bigger payload that it can deliver.

Uragan rockets could be upgraded but they are not going to be better than upgraded Smerch rockets and the fact that upgraded Grad rockets have comparable reach in terms of range and make up for its smaller payload by having 40 rockets per launcher means the Uragan is the expendable one.

I also think you overstate the difficulty of making the 220mm rockets.

They said they will phase out Uragan rockets, they didn't say they would stop making TOS and TOS-2 rockets which are also 220mm calibre.

They already have the propellant and composite casing technology for the 122mm rockets. It is just a matter of using that in a larger diameter rocket. They will eventually use those materials in the Smerch as well with 300mm. So adding them to an intermediate rocket isn't going to be much of an issue.

I don't think anyone thinks they can't do it, it is more a case of choosing not to.

They also decided to phase out the 122mm calibre guns in the form of the D-30 towed gun and the 2S1 self propelled artillery vehicle... the payoff was that it was rather similar to the 100mm and 120mm and 125mm weapons already in use so eliminating an entire calibre made sense... the 122mm gun could be replaced by 120mm gun/mortar weapons in towed and self propelled versions (2S34 Hosta) which could fire 120mm mortar bombs of east and west, 120mm shells with propellent charges to 13km compared with 15km for the 122mm gun, and the 120mm gun/mortar could also fire the 122mm guided missiles called Kitilov, so for a small reduction in range they could eliminate an entire calibre from their inventory. The 120mm shells were similar in power to the 122mm... 2mm is not much of a difference. And there were light mobile towed 120mm gun mortar mounts that could easily replace the D-30.... but after experience they seem to have decided to keep them.

They might decide down the track to keep using the Uragan missile perhaps... the 15 tube pallet means the two pallet vehicle could carry 30 rockets ready to fire which is rather more potent that Uragan ever was with 16 ready to fire tubes.

Unless they decide that that truck with two pallets for 220mm rockets could replace TOS which also carried 30 rockets didn't it?

The new TOS is truck based and unifying the TOS and Rocket artillery trucks together into two vehicles... one carrying one pallet and one carrying two pallets of 6 x Smerch rockets, or 15 x TOS rockets, or how many 122mm rockets?

But then small light vehicles with 80mm air launched artillery rocket pods seem to be of interest too...

In the middle term, I think they need to make a vehicle roughly the size of the BAZ truck, with a modular system which can optionally carry various kinds of rockets, and maybe even cruise missiles just like the Brazilian ASTROS system.

I think for targets deep in enemy territory that ramjet and scramjet powered missiles that can manouver and hit point targets will be rather more cost effective than volleys of unguided rockets... having 40 launch tubes makes no sense if you are firing one rocket at each point target and then driving away to avoid counter battery fire.

Having a launcher with 6 missiles makes more sense and you could launch all 6 missiles at individual targets if you have the target data at the time of launch... this will also help complicate the task of the enemy air defence.

Furthermore  at that time the various belorussian firms like MZKT can be better integrated into the Russian production.

Russia would benefit from more production capacity... and more workers too....

And would not be throwing away the lives of their new citizens on adventures to steal money like the west does all the time.

The INF treaty is gone so now Russia can work on intermediate range missiles, whether low flying subsonic cruise missiles like the new Kh-50 cheap subsonic land attack cruise missile designed to be carried by light tactical fighters and potentially ground launched too with a range of 1,000 to 1,500km or so with accurate terminal guidance, or perhaps a ramjet or scramjet powered semi ballistic missile perhaps with different versions with ranges of 250 or 500 or 750 or 1,000 or 1,500 or 2,000 or 2,500km range with different payload weight options and ramjet or scramjet propulsion to evade enemy air defences to ensure it makes it to the target... mass production would be cheap and fuel would be cheap because it would not need to carry lots of oxidiser because it is a jet engine.

You might say... cruise missile are expensive... no they are not... ramjet and scramjet engines have no shafts and no blades and few moving parts and are essentially an air breathing rocket jet engine. The terminal guidance would be needed for a ballistic rocket if you actually want to hit targets but a jet powered manouvering missile would be more likely to actually reach the target. Guidance and propulsion will probably be cheaper.

They could make air launched versions too if required and produce them in enormous numbers.

Russian chassis entering use.

Well the earlier announcement was that the 220mm rockets and rocket launchers would be produced but that the use of the Uragan 220mm rocket would be scaled back gradually.

This news does not actually contradict that in the sense that it says what we were speculating all along that the new two pallet truck would replace the Smerch and Uragan chassis and that its ability to take 12 300mm Smerch rockets in two pallets of 6 rockets, or 30 220mm Uragan rockets in two pallets of 15 rockets, or a mix of 6 x 300mm rockets and 15 x 220mm rockets in one load was an accurate guess.

So they are saying that the original Uragan separate truck will be replaced by this two pallet truck.

So it says the new truck can carry 300mm and 220mm pallets but it does not mention 122mm pallets.

Does this mean the lighter single pallet vehicle can carry any single pallet of the three, so it can have 122mm or 220mm or 300mm rocket pallets?

Or is it just the 122mm vehicle?

Also it mentions in the new article that the new vehicle can carry up to 21 units.

Specifically

(in such a combined bicaliber configuration, the ammunition load of one 9A53 combat vehicle will reach 21 units).

So when carrying two calibres it carries 21 rockets... 15 plus 6.

That suggests it can't carry 122mm or does it mean it wont?

I have said before that the rapid reload is a nice paper feature but for survival after it broadcasts to the world where it is by launching a volley of rockets it needs to move away immediately so no matter how fast it can reload it should be moving.

When it gets to its new launch position it has not revealed its location so has all the time in the world to load and fire again... and move of course.

This has the added advantage that when moving they are not loaded so if hit by drone only reload vehicles will burn.

Wow... that is huge, because previously we only speculated that a 220mm launcher could launch TOS or Uragan rockets, but specifically stating that a vehicle could carry either rocket type, but also that it can also be used to carry 140mm rockets for delivering minefields as well.

This is excellent news... the original TOS has a short range and was T-72 based to operate near front lines, but the improved TOS-2 has a longer flight range and is truck based and is designed to be operated further back from the front line where the better mobility of a truck was a benefit...

So if it is hanging back 10-12km from the front line it makes sense for it to carry TOS-2 and 140mm mine rockets but also Uragan rockets as well for taking opportunities like attacking enemy armour in their rear perhaps forming up for a push, while also being able to hit fortifications on the front line with TOS and clearing minefields for an attack with TOS or creating minefields behind enemy lines if your attack succeeds and they try to withdraw.

I would suggest having a container for 122mm rockets would also be worth while because although the 122mm rocket only carries two sensor fused top attack anti armour munitions per rocket compared with 5 per 300mm rocket, a pallet of 45 122mm rockets would mean 90 top attack munitions per vehicle per volley, compared with 60 with 12 300mm rocket tubes. The shorter range would be fine of the enemy targets are moving up to support their forces on the front line, so 36km range is good enough to reach 26km behind enemy lines while you are 10km behind your own lines.

This is excellent.

Amusing they combine minelaying 140mm with mine clearing 220mm and just general artillery 220mm rockets on one platform now, and being a truck it will be cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate than any track layer.

The thing that rotates on the missile that lies horizontally is the tail stabilizer.
The warhead that rotates while standing vertically is just shown for expo, it does not rotate on the missile body.
Those are typical rudders. Missile has two in-flight points where it corrects its flight path using GLONASS.

Not just that but also the rocket delivered anti armour mines will destroy any HATO tank too... and can be delivered anywhere you need it.

When it says steering wheel it just means the front control fins steer the rocket to hit the point on the ground it was aimed at.

As you can imagine, these rockets are effectively telegraph pole sized weapons and as each one is launched it causes turbulence in the air that the next rockets have to fly through.

It was in the late 1980s I believe that they started putting gyros in each of the rockets so they wont veer off course , but this just meant they landed in a group rather than all over the place.

With these rockets most of the time you don't want them all to hit the same place on the ground because the targets you launch these rockets at are spread all over the place and often spread out to avoid all being killed or damaged by one shell or bomb.

This makes rockets effective against things air delivered bombs and shells are not so good against like 300 soldiers spread out over a field where one shell or bomb might get a couple but it would take so long to deliver a lot of shells or bombs it s no longer effective.

In comparison a rocket barrage covers a wide area quickly with shock waves and fragmentation.

The use of artillery rockets against Patriot batteries is unusual because it is a point target and would be better hit by something like the long range Hermes with terminal homing.

A staging point for armour where the armour is all grouped up to be refuelled and rearmed or troops getting on board their armoured troop transports is where rocket artillery really shines because top attack weapons as shown, and there is even a 300mm Smerch rocket with about 640 shaped charge top attack submunitions per rocket... when you have large numbers of armoured vehicles and you launch a dozen of these rockets to shower an area with HEAT top attack submunitions, you allow a good overlap and not much will come out unscathed.

These are very powerful weapons, which the west have turned into a gimmick and made horrendously expensive in the west, but the Russians appreciate and produce in large numbers.

Any HATO force tries to enter Ukraine and they will be in real trouble because they have no way of stopping hypersonic missiles destroying their air defences and once they are destroyed glide bombs and drones will arse-rape them.

The Orcs are not totally incompetent, certainly the first groups were battle hardened and HATO trained... there is little training that prepares you for an air attack and artillery attack.

The Polish forces are not magic (no disrespect) and this wont be some peace keeping mission where US air power keeps them safe and all they have to worry about are a few damn natives with sharpened fruit.