Garry

I was talking about possible Chinese invation to far east Russia and was replied that our salvo forces will stop them. Later I asked a bit more about Soviet/Russian salvo systems and was quite ammazed with them..... probably it is nothing new for you but it impressed me a lot.... what are global peers for these weapons? With these systems any massive attacks of China would make no sence at all..... I heard India and UAE has signed in to buy some Smerch....

1) TOS-1-4 Buratino.
I understand this is a short-range system (3.5 km) destroying everthing on a cetain area with compression waves and fire.... I have seen a marketing movie showing the effect of this on a building near which a rocket has hit.... it basically folded!!!
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ssia/tos-1.htm
http://warfare.ru/?catid=240&linkid=1582

2) Smerch
The recent version of this system has a standard range of 90km and can shoot a UAV which gives its observation of the target!!! Very powerful salvo can destroy a divsion and while system is quite mobile to be detected and destroyed.... by aviation! System is also very precise at its standard 90km range.

The new work is in development of new weaker munitions but with extended range of up to 190km at cost of less precision!!!

http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/index.asp
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/smerch/

3) Uragan.... something like less advanced Smerch... I don't understand why somebody would need this if Smerch is available.... range is just 35km.
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/uragan/index.asp

4) and the good old Grad about which everybody know to much anyway..... This system is so cheap that half the world has it.... the range of this small truck is 40km and pretty good salvo power for small size of the system.
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/grad1/index.asp

I also learned that it is widelly used
http://www.artillery-mz.com/ru/supply/

why Iraqis never used Uragan or Grad during the Gulf wars? if they used much larger Scuds why did not use Uragan/Grad which are much easier to hide?

I never heard them using any salvo weapons during both wars.... if hided in Nasiriya it could hit a US millitary colums while approaching city by the road at distance of 35km. 38 seconds would have been just enough to make large damage and they hide it back some house or ditch.... it could be masked as a normal truck or fuel tank...

hello

None of these salvos can target stealth targets and all of them except Smerch can be destroyed or knocked out by an f35s laser. However, since tanks aren't stealthy, these salvos can really be threat to tanks.

Garry

it does not need to attack anything stealthy.... it is intended for full scale combats.

nobody shoots salvo for a single tank or single bunker.... the salvo weapons against collective targets like collections of enemy infantry and tanks during attacks or retreats.... and some infrastructure. It was first time used in WW II in famous Katyusha on Russian side and 5-barreled german NbWrf 42 / Nebelwerfer 41.

the munitions there are unguided (except for Smerch), quite cheap, but very powerful..... this weapon is used to clear areas. Indeed Grad clears 15 hectares of area from anything alive.... while Smerch clears around 64 hectares....

In 1994 Chechen rebels used a captured Grad units against a marching column of Russian troops. Few salvos and very few tanks survived the attack and almost nobody of infantry in APCs.

Regarding lazer. I guess normal weapons can easily destroy Grad or Smerch. The problem is that you can hide this weapons easily or mask them as a normal truck.... then enemy would have to destroy all trucks in the area of 90km to make sure nobody shoots a salvo.

Anon

The US has equivelant systems, particularly MLRS/ATACM.

Garry

Yes I looked at MLRS and it is quite impressive with its 12 rockets in salvo

MLRS MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM, USA
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mlrs/specs.html
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m270.htm

However seems that range is around 52km with a weaker munition and 32km with standard munition. Then this would be same class as Grad but much less capable than Smerch. Does it means that there is nothing unclassified to match Smerch? (I mean multiple launch systems)

I also read that average unit cost was $2.3mln in 1999 while Grad is below $0.5mln per truck... and Smerch much above that with $8mln per unit.
__________________________
The longer range is with the Army TACMS, that uses same platform. I guess its range is 60miles (100km) and being extended to 180miles.

M39 Army Tactical Missile System (Army TACMS)
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/atacms.htm

However this is a tactical missile not cheap rockets.... and hence the weapon is more a match to Iskander, which has slightly less range of 151nm (280 km) but much heavier load...
http://www.deagel.com/pandora/?p=mn00157001

This weapons cost a lot and are not shut in Salvo for large areas... like Smerch does.
_____________

Now tell me why do you think Iraq never shoot any salvo on attacking forces? Was it possible to use this weapon in 2003?

Anon

The range of ATACM is 300+ Km.

It's fired from the same launch unit. ATACM is also GPS guided, and the MLRS System in general is GPS aided.

MLRS is easily the most advanced multiple launch rocket system in existence, and has been since it's introduction.

magic-spaceship

not to mention we will soon be introducing gps guided rockets for the mlrs.

Garry

Seems like ATACM has a range close to the one prohibited by US/USSR treaty on tactical missiles. This was the reasone why Iskander showed up - a version with range stripped down to just 280km but increased ability to change trajectories.... still both are not a match to Multi Launch Systems.

As for MLRS. Why it is simply most advanced? Can you support your statement?
Range.... not. weight of load.... not. Precision.... probably beter than Grad but not Smerch. Cost..... no way!!! both in terms of launch unit and munitions. The reloading spead.... no. I see no real advantages, unless I missed something.
____________

How did you prevent Iraq from making salvos? If Iraq was shooting other types of short range missiles to Kuwait why not salvos from Grad or Uragan?

Garry

Smerch is self guided.... it first shoots UAVs (Pchela) above expected targets. Having got a visual image of the area (day/night) Pchela identifies the targets and then gives coordinates to the salvo that is unguided.

GPS guiding still needs first to identify where the target is...

magic-spaceship

thats why the US employs UAVs, and Foward Observers, and Scout helicopters, so the uav from the smerch tells them where the target is - same as the US assets - only US assets then relay that info to rockets that are guided in flight by that data - unlike the smerch which fires unguided rounds. I think you miss the point that modern armies employ arty fire locating radars that track back to the source for counter battery fire. Arty is great but its still vulnerable to enemy too. Look at ww1 and the kilo tons of arty fired off before an offensive - that did little to soften the enemy. Arty is not the end all end all - but just one block in the combined arms battle plan.

Garry

yes sure. My point was that Smerch does not need help of other troops or units to find its target.... it can indentify its target without much help.

Arty radars is something I know too few about. Probably used by both Soviets and US.

WW1 experience where fortified positions could not be broke through with fire was cancelled with WW2 experience showing that firepower grew to such a scale that any ultimatelly fortified position could destroyed by concentrated fire power..... be it an artilery or aviation
_______________

why MLRS is more advanced with its range, weight of salvo, reloading time and cost?

what did you do to prevent Iraqis making a single salvo on your troops?

magic-spaceship

but while arty fire power was increasing - so was the counter battery fire to it. Thats why shoot and scoot ability is an important asset to modern arty.
And armies still make use of fortified positions all the time. If arty by its self was so great - so much work into making it more accurate would not be going on.

My understanding is the Iraq's arty was pretty much non-effective against us the first time around because we were able to counter it so quick and we took out a lot of their soviet style centralized command and control structure. I dont know about how well it was used against us durring OIF.


As for MLRS cost and soviets cheapness - well there is a lot of reasons for that. Part of the cost of the MLRS is because of the climate which it is developed and produced in. Many western weapons are considered high cost - while their also considered high quality, while russian weapons are known for being cheap and not of the highest quality. I dont think you really want to go with cost as a argument. Have you ever considered the fact that the US has no need for a rocket the size of the smerch? Whats the point of having a rocket between the MLRS and ATACM? That just puts strain on the supply and support system - while we have other systems that supplants its need. Plus once the inflight gps guided rockets are brought into use - that will mean more effective rockets - meaning more bang for your buck and less rockets having to be put on target to detroy it.

hello

How effective would a couple of Smerches be against a vehicle/tank column with M-39s/MLRSs and Apache and Predator cover?

VovaLee

There will be no tank after rocket start-up.

hello

... or no Smerches before rocket start-up can happen.