They have the RM-70 vampir from Czech as well and it's basically a grad with a much heavier armoured base that can carry 2 salvos. It's very accurate and the grouping is much tighter because if its weight. It's incredibly effective for counter battery fire. The crews say that they only need to fire half a salvo to hit a target.
Also it's a 900km front with hundreds of thousands of enemies Having an old weapon is better than not having a weapon at all and quantity absolutely matters. Ukraine also really needs anything that can be used for indirect fire.
The grad doesn't need to be precise. While most modern artillery are the equivalent of a sniper rifle where they take out one specific enemy with great precision, the grad is like a shotgun version of artillery. It's a ''screw everything in that direction'' type of weapon. They have different uses but they're both very useful.
You don't need precision, but you need a lot of rockets to do the job that 1 HIMARS rocket can accomplish. That translates the need for a lot of trucks, freight trains to haul a lot of rockets.
@@ichimonjiguyThe HIMARS isn't really firing cheap dumb rockets like the grad. It literally fires expensive guided short range ballistic missiles. Very effective for precision strikes behind enemy lines, but not really useful when there is just a bunch of infantry scattered around trenches. The only common thing between the two systems is that they started out as MLRS artillery, but they couldn't be further apart when it comes to the role they are used for.
@@stoyantodorov2133HIMARS can use cluster munitions to fulfill the role of area effect, except more precisely than the Grad can. The only downside to HIMARS as you stated is just how expensive the munitions are for it.
@wsj at 1:47 the graph is being misinterpreted. It's not the chance that a human is directly hit by a rocket launched from X distance away, it's the chance that shrapnel from a rocket explosion will hit a human standing X feet away.
The article missed one of, if not THE reason that it's still in use: Economics: It's cheap and fulfills a purpose. It is only a western point of view that describes it as obsolete, as it's compared to longer range precision weapons (that may or may not work/be spoofed). It does the job it was designed for well and cheaply, hence it's still in use.
@@TonyBustaroni the only good BTR is the 82A, mi8s are nothing compared to western helis, bmp1s were influential yes but not good or effective, t55s were okay but the t64s were the only russian tank that was actually ahead of its time.
lol when ukraine fires a grad rocket it always happens to land on an expensive russian artillery piece, while russian rockets always land on civillians.
That's not reasonable modernization for grad rocket, to expensive and small effect, for grad are developed new fuses that make him 30% deadly and there are rocket with inertial navigation system
The true reason they are still using it is because they can obtain ammo from Bulgaria, which is the second largest producer in the world of soviet artillery calibers. Do better research WSJ
No they clearly have no clue what they are talking about, they claim the vehicle is obsolete, it is not, they talk about it being armored, it is artillery so not intended to be armored, they talk about lack of precision, it was never designed to be precise. Almost everything they say is out of ignorance on the subject. If you want to learn about the conflict from someone with some actual knowledge I recommend channels like Perun, a Australian that I believe is a military analyst.
They are just Artillery rounds with rocket motors but not as precise just they are good for proliferating the target in a short time if lucky enough to be on it.
Unguided rocked does mean it meats targets complete ty it beed more Rocket to kille inside the area! And easy to reload and cheap to nake even tali an used Grad rockeat
Thank you to the Great USA for helping Ukraine in the fight against Russian fascism! Now, as during World War II, Great America is making a huge contribution to the victory over evil. I don't have enough words to express my gratitude to the people of America. Although I’m not even a citizen of Ukraine, it pains me to look at the injustice that Putler is doing.
Or you just don’t know what’s going on there and what the cause of the conflict is. And when you find out, you will say something completely different.
Is simple really is cheap and goes the job that it needs to do and that is to weaken positions and go back. Yes it is old and becoming outdated but is cheaper than new ones why get one really expensive when you can get a dozen of these you can say ofc that is not accurate but being able to use them more often than never is better than not at all. That is how I see it
Russia use grad just fine its important to note Russia generally they dont invest on precise accurate like himas if the rockets are created to use gps they will cost more ; russia they want to reduce cost while still maintaining shear firing power thats their ground attacking doctrine thats why they further developed new grads bm27 rm70. Usa can fire 1 rocket cost while russia can fire 10 cost you pick your option
Russia has precision guided MLRS - the smerch (although only a few of it's missle variants are guided). Grad is just too small in calibre to be comparable to the previous two systems.
Very effective against massed attacks- which is how wars were fought in the past. Not so much now, but it is an area denial weapon. It doesn't need to be precise to thwart an advance
Sure it has a use even today and agienst any military but sure most be so inefficient it's not worth making ammo for it but worth shooting up what there
@@mitchyoung93 Ukraine is doing an excellent job in this particular battlefield. They're not doing soviet and chinese-style mass wave attacks where this rocket system would excel. Instead, while being slow they are steadily degrading their enemy while keeping losses at a minimum. It is very telling that the russians have not managed to mount any meaningful counter-offensive and has continually lost ground as to how well ukraine's army is doing in over a year
"Ukraine has used Grads against artillery and infrantry, while Russia fires them against cities". Thank you WSJ, peak journalism right there. Totally accurate and unbiased. Definitely an objective view. It's not like Ukraine has fired into Donetsk for 10 years now, or any missiles fell on their own cities recently.
Ah yes, another video trying to tell us how technologically superior western weapons are compared to the Soviet ones (I said Soviet, not Russian, I am NOT pro-russian because I am Romanian and we know what Russia does when it becomes imperialist once again). The Grad is more cost effective than the Himars and, if used for its intended purposes, it will be more deadly. As pointed out in the video, they are supposed to attack and run back. They are used to supress fire, hit large areas like military bases and they also have a role in psychological warfare. However, there are mistakes in the video like for example calling the Ural trucks "unreliable". Alright, maybe the 375D wasn't the greatest, but I haven't really seen those trucks all that often, most of them are Ural 4320 which are better since they have different engines. Then, they try to say that having no armor is a disadvantage. It really isn't, as these MLRS's are not being used too close to the combat area, they are usually placed behind the frontlines.
Because a truck that lobs unguided rockets at the enemy is better than no truck at all. I am sure that Ukraine would love to have 200 HIMARS and an unlimited supply of rockets. They don't. So if you have a soviet era truck and a bunch of soviet era rockets. then you use said truck to lobeth said rockets at thy foe, who, not being blessed, shall snuffeth. Book of Armaments, Chapter two, verses 9 through 21.
anything we can get our hands on. bc aint nobody is interested in supplying long rawnge missles and jets. and after almost 2 years and barely any tanks arrived theyve become now useless, since everything is mined
@@Алексей-ч2ф9л No, that's a HIMARS missile hitting another Russian supply depot because it's the 21st century and Russians still haven't figured out how logistics work.
@@OrIoN1989 it’s a good contender and likely we will never know production numbers of either but I’d still wager the 9m22u being more numerous than the pg-7 due to the fact that the pg-7 has been replaced and supplanted by other projectiles like the pg-7V and pg-7L. That’s pedantic though.
BM21 is "dear grid coordinates". When you have plenty of those, why not use it to deprive enemy of sleep and ability to safely rotate and evacuate expended units.
Use what you got. Simple concept, easy to understand. Except it seems difficult for people that are not there, have better and believe they would do it differently.
I think saying it need alot of ammo as bad is undermining the main use of this. If you want restrict enemy movement, you need to surpress them. If you want to surpress them, you need volume, which mean it need alot of it. Grad is anti area weapon. So regardless if it has new ammo with guidance system or not, when it need to do suppressing fire, it will demand alot of it. So this aspect is not highlighting how bad the system is, but how bad manufacturing infrastructure that supporting Ukraine is. Unless Himars has 127mm-180mm munition that can easily produced and delivered to Ukraine, i don't see Grad will be replaced. The cluster munition that used in Ukraine come in very small number that they use only 1 rocket/ engagement. I saw one vid that show how it failed to suppress Russian troops movement. Tl;dr : no matter how technological advance the system is, when the role demand high number of munition/system, what you need to do is making it as much as you can.
There are also a lot of countries that have stockpiles of grad rockets but not GIMLRs rockets. If Poland, Bulgaria or Albania says "hey we've got some extra grad rockets lying around do you want them?" Ukraine is going to say "yes please" and then send them with haste on to the nearest Russian forces. This is especially important given Ukraine's more limited access to artillery shells and mortars.
"Ukraine have used these rockets to attack Russian military targets, whilst Russia have used these rockets to attack civilian targets." While Russia has used its arsenal against civilian targets numerous times (Grads, cruise missiles, artillery, you name it), the vast majority of Russian weaponry is used against Ukrainian **military targets**. Had the Russians used every grad and artillery piece they had on civilian targets, they would've: A. Been annihilated by a relatively unharmed Ukrainian Army. (70% of UA's casualties are from Russian artillery!) B. Levelled every city East of Kiev. (We're talking about millions of artillery shells!) I'm also sure that Ukrainians have killed Russian civilians, as it is nigh-impossible to fire accurate shots into cities and villages with artillery older than its operators. I'm not saying it was intentional, but it's probably happened.
When Ukraine uses it, it's heroic and good and all that kind of thing. When Russia does it, it's very cowardly and probably a war crime, but very naughty either way. I know this because I have watched a lot of Western left leaning media, and they're so trustworthy, like politicians and used car salesmen.
Czechs added some upgrades to this weapon system, digital fire control, automatic reload, Tatra truck all wheel drive for better off road performance and armoured cabin for crew protection, I think, Ukrainians will like it, it's called RM70 Vampir Sláva Ukrajině 🇺🇦 from 🇨🇿
The Ukrainians do love it. I can't remember how many Ukraine have but because of its weight it's much more accurate and it has much tighter grouping. United24 did a video with a crew of a vampir and the crew commander said that it's a force of nature. He said that they only need to fire half a salvo to hit a target. They mostly use it for counter battery fire because it's so accurate and has such tight grouping. There is a clip that shows them hitting an area on the left bank of the dnipro with just half a salvo and it's incredibly effective.
@@brookwhiteman9810 thanks mate, I don't even know, how many weapons we've sent, our politicians don't talk about it, but then you see trains loaded with T72 tanks and BMP armoured vehicles, it's obvious where they are heading to.. unfortunately our Soviet weapons are not a game changer, but we do what we can, I actually like, our government doesn't comment on this, we don't need to let the enemy know what we are doing... I wish USA would train Ukrainian soldiers on Apache helicopters, it would help them to demolish ruSSian trenches 😉
The autoloader's usually left empty to minimize chance of cookoffs if a Lancet or FPV drone or arty shell lands nearby, but in other regards, RM70 is a beast in a good sense of word
"Ukraine have used these rockets to attack Russian military targets, whilst Russia have used these rockets to attack civilian targets." -WSJ This is just biased and bad reporting, if Russia is truly that incompetent, they would have already been defeated. Ukrainians are not super soldier miracles, go see Russian footages as well to get unbiased views.
@@bigbake132It's a relevant comment though, in the west we have a media telling us the Russian army is both cruel and incompetent. And still they hold a lot of occupied territory despite Ukraine doing everything they can to repell the invasion at the same time as they have a cart blanched in regard to western equipment.
You’ve made a small mistake in your report. It’s Ukraine who bombarded civilians in cities, not Russia. And if this artillery was outdated in the 90s why it is so widely used? Isn’t it obsolete? As always great journalistic work.
This war showed us how outdated the Russians army is. We overestimated their technology. How pathetic to have a slice advantage against Ukraine when you were supposed to by the second army in the world. China number 2, Russia number 20 two step ahead of Ukraine number 22
The Russians may also use the Grad but many of those are upgraded to Tornado G's, they use GLONASS guided rockets. Also this MLRS is comparable to a aerial denial weapon, it's meant to target/suppress large grid coordinates with volume of fire vs Point-systems like Tornado-S/Smerch or HIMARS. It's usage serves a different purpose. Also on the second point the US has sent Ukraine systems they also use right NOW! like M109 Paladins, M777's, various MRAP's, Bradley's etc. And they've also been destroyed just as easily....
@@gregorylouis617 98% of what we have sent to Ukraine is 30 years old at best. We use some 777 and some armour vehicles but in different context. The difference is we use technology and air superiority. We don’t throw troops to run in open field with no air support and with some inaccurate artillery barrage. Again if Russians were advanced they wouldn’t struggle in Ukraine. Not to be an @$$ but Ukraine is not famous for being a strong military power
@@Sebby6666 lorl like you have any weapons that is built in 2023 or 2013 or 14 still you have same weapons only missile are changing but you launch them from old weapons
@@Sebby6666 " We use some 777 and some armour vehicles but in different context. Umm which vehicles being, the US Army still uses Strykers, M113's, Bradley's, M109's, HIMARS the various MRAP models. The only one I'd argue is some 30 odds years behind will be the M1A1 Abrams tanks they send in. If we're talking about mass, a large majority of the largest militaries ARE comprised of older tech. This modern conventional war isn't like anything the US and NATO has fought in decades. Literally 0 experience in this department, which is why the West started running out of ammo to give the Ukrainians. You think the USA can just never run out of PGM's or something in a large-scale conventional war? It's more cost effective to lob cheap 152mm or 155mm artillery shells, even MLRS dumb rockets, then waste Excalibur or Krasnopol-M's on a target that just needs suppression.
@@gregorylouis617 well if you don’t understand how the USA fight… We don’t fight like Russians or any other countries, we make it seems east because we have a far superiority logistic and technology. Irak was stronger than Ukraine was when the Russians invaded. It’s lot like anything the U.S. fought because we don’t allow any army to pin us down. Now it was stupid to invade other countries, but purely military speaking no other nation can match us. The low munitions are are in are munitions we don’t really use. The Russian struggling in Ukraine only shows us how bad their military is and there is a reason why India and China cancelled their orders.
"Ukraine uses it to hit mostly Russian artillery and infantry, Russia uses it to hit cities like Kharkiv." Mind blowing use of selectively biased language here. Unguided rockets hit whatever is in their way. They have no guidance, that's the point. Both sides aim it at their opponents forces and both side's rockets end up hitting civilian structures. This is truly an "our noble warriors, their barbarian hordes" moment.
Because when you aim an unguided mlrs into a civilian city, you are guaranteed to hit civilians which is the same as targeting them as well. Ukraine uses it mostly closer to the frontline. Otherwise you’d see 50000 videos from every single angle of a single strike into a major city like Donetsk for example.
@@oleksii000when you hide inside civilians areas using every building to your advantage and have thousands of troops in an area, you make yourself the target for artillery of all types.
You still aim the thing -- being off by a full kilometer at the 50km range still demands deliberate aiming at a city to hit it. "Unguided" is not the equivalent of giving a toddler an espresso shot and a puppy, it just translates to a dispersal area that's larger than the blast zone of a single impact.
I'll also add that on radar, the unguided rockets are identical to the guided rockets fired by HIMARS. So it's good to fire unguided rockets alongside guided rockets to act as decoys. The enemy has no reliable way to differentiate between the two, so even if they have the means to intercept them, they are unlikely to intercept the guided rocket over the unguided ones.
when they fire an expensive big missile like SCALP or Storm Shadow, im sure they send a lot of lesser missiles and drones ahead of them to exhaust the air defence on junk. Probably why they always hit what they intend to hit with the main missiles.
That is accurate. They do a lot of prodding into the enemy's defenses to determine the best mix of drone, missile, guided/unguided before going for a significant target. In the last few months Russia has blamed the destruction of their airfields and ammunitions on the use of storm shadows. Only for Ukraine to say nah, it was this 30 year old cluster missile that did it. @@dennisbradley5620
AK 47 is just one of those guns that you just can’t get enough of in 90 years later you’ll still see AK-47s being used that’s how good of a rifle that is
Not really, at least if you mean the AK-47 specifically. AK pattern rifles are ubiquitous, but nowadays you'll find fewer and fewer actual AK-47s because there are newer variants such as AKM, AK-74 and AK-12.
It's cheap. Mass produced. Durable. Russia has developed newer and better variants of it from my understanding. I don't know if it's the AK107. No recoil. But in small numbers
Why is it OK for Ukraine to use unguided rockets, but when Palestinians use unguided rockets people complain how barbaric they are for using them? Am I seeing a double standard here?
Palestinians have civilians as their target. Not civilians casualties while targeting militants. They actually target civilians. It isn't their weapon choice that is complained about.
@@specialingu no. They specifically fire into cities with no military target at all. Aim is to kill civilians. Target us the civilians. Not a military target and not minding that civilians are killed. The civilians are their target
On a Viking cemetery on Greenland they found a body with a stone weapon between his ribs. It may have been the brother of Leif, named Thorvald? The only one from the Sagas that we know died in America. But the fact is, that you are just as dead when being hit with this weapon, as with an iron weapon.
Most vehicles and their crews will not survive an anti-tank mine. This is a shortcoming of that rocket launcher. Some armored US vehicles aren't mine resistant. Along as Ukraine can get rockets for these vehicles, they are worth using in some circumstances. You don't go to war with the weapons you want. You go with the weapons you have.
Seriously? It's because Ukraine still has a lot of them left. Why not use anything you can when you are outnumbered 10-1 just so you can stand your ground.... Russia has way more of these.
This is a mobile field artillery( same as 120mm mortars and howitzers.) These are meant to provide accurate artillery support for infantry officers. The officers radio in the location they need it and the team does the calculations to set the target. They are accurate enough to provide “danger close” fire support. There are 3 factors which affect the accuracy 1. The age and quality of the rocket. This is beyond Ukraine’s control. They just use what they get 2. The training the soilders have with this system and their experience. This would determine if they provide “danger close” support or just pre engagement bombing. 3. A high level of understanding of the battlefield( eg terrain and weather) In the hands of an experienced and well trained team these are both accurate and deadly(that’s something Ukrainians lack as it’s not a system which u can just pick up and go) About it being undivided, almost all artillery are unguided, putting in guidance increases the cost over 10x that’s why all military still use these type of “unguided” systems as they provide soldiers on the front lines quick artillery support. Similar rocket systems are used in Apache helicopters. And the USA has coined a term for acceptable civilian deaths as “ collateral damage”.
@@alpinestuff8377 no clue, a rocket is just chemicals with a compression trigger. But guidance systems are a whole different ballgame. Just look at the complexity of a computer vs a typewriter. The rockets are typewriters.
ive wondered how much of the area effect is from the vehicle rocking as it fires off the salvo.. would you get significantly tighter grouping with using stabilizers like a crane has?
Recoiless rifle shot at a long distance These rockets aren't good against armor at all but it can kill soldiers and is a scare tactic weapon not meant to start a war but to give signals to the other side we're still here. They're either too short range or hitting too small objects and in truth you would need to upscale it with bigger explosions to have an effect. They're not using the war criminal chemicals these weapons were constructed to use. They're outdated rockets shot away like a rifle and then they ask for more ammo which provide more income to both ukraine and the weapon suppliers. They use it because it's cheap and there's plenty of countries who see no threat of an outdated weapon in a meaningless war where they are waiting for putin to die by old age. Even if Ukraine would be supplied with the best artillery they wouldn't be able to use it since they have no way to move the frontier forward.
i once stubled upon one of those rockets, live, just lying on the ground,. that was in the southern Libyan desert, i guess it fell out of one of those chech 8x8 launchers the Libyan army had. the wires were ripped off halfway.
I'm amazed that the Grad can hit something as close as 32 feet away - I supposed that happens when the rocket doesn't ignite and falls out of the launcher?? Or are you referring to kill radius, instead of range?
The main benfit of the grad is it volume and ability to give surpressing fire
Yeah, that’s exactly what I wanted to post in comment, but you did it first. Point for you ;-)
They have the RM-70 vampir from Czech as well and it's basically a grad with a much heavier armoured base that can carry 2 salvos. It's very accurate and the grouping is much tighter because if its weight. It's incredibly effective for counter battery fire. The crews say that they only need to fire half a salvo to hit a target.
Also it's a 900km front with hundreds of thousands of enemies Having an old weapon is better than not having a weapon at all and quantity absolutely matters. Ukraine also really needs anything that can be used for indirect fire.
@@ethank5059 Russia will soon enough be in the millions😊
what about cost? I would imagine that it's much cheaper than a HIMARS
"the enemy is in that direction"
"sir yes sir, removing that direction"
The grad doesn't need to be precise. While most modern artillery are the equivalent of a sniper rifle where they take out one specific enemy with great precision, the grad is like a shotgun version of artillery. It's a ''screw everything in that direction'' type of weapon. They have different uses but they're both very useful.
=AND THE BEST SHOTGUNS IN EXISTENCE ARE STILL THESE "TRENCH BROOMS" THAT HAD PLACE AT WW1,HEHE
=SO,THESE GRADS ARE TO STAY,HEHEHE........
You don't need precision, but you need a lot of rockets to do the job that 1 HIMARS rocket can accomplish. That translates the need for a lot of trucks, freight trains to haul a lot of rockets.
@@ichimonjiguy But is HIMARS used for suppressive fire as the Grad is intended?
@@ichimonjiguyThe HIMARS isn't really firing cheap dumb rockets like the grad. It literally fires expensive guided short range ballistic missiles. Very effective for precision strikes behind enemy lines, but not really useful when there is just a bunch of infantry scattered around trenches. The only common thing between the two systems is that they started out as MLRS artillery, but they couldn't be further apart when it comes to the role they are used for.
@@stoyantodorov2133HIMARS can use cluster munitions to fulfill the role of area effect, except more precisely than the Grad can. The only downside to HIMARS as you stated is just how expensive the munitions are for it.
@wsj at 1:47 the graph is being misinterpreted. It's not the chance that a human is directly hit by a rocket launched from X distance away, it's the chance that shrapnel from a rocket explosion will hit a human standing X feet away.
WSJ lacks any technical expertise to run a story even on a AK47
The article missed one of, if not THE reason that it's still in use: Economics: It's cheap and fulfills a purpose. It is only a western point of view that describes it as obsolete, as it's compared to longer range precision weapons (that may or may not work/be spoofed). It does the job it was designed for well and cheaply, hence it's still in use.
It's simply. They have it, they have ammo for it and they need to fire explosives at Russians. It works.
Ask any war veteran that meet grad they would mention they are the most terrifying piece of artillery you would meet. Along with the 207mm pion spg
Cheap, durable, deadly and precise enough with general use of cheap drones for aerial recon.
Just like ak 47,pkm , t55, mig 19 , bmp 1, btr 60, and mi mil 8
@@carkawalakhatulistiwaonly the first 2
@@night7185The Mi-8 is also incredible. Rest are very outdated though.
@@stoyantodorov2133 mi 8 is not incredible lol
@@TonyBustaroni the only good BTR is the 82A, mi8s are nothing compared to western helis, bmp1s were influential yes but not good or effective, t55s were okay but the t64s were the only russian tank that was actually ahead of its time.
lol when ukraine fires a grad rocket it always happens to land on an expensive russian artillery piece, while russian rockets always land on civillians.
A mix of high tech and low tech is better then everything hight tech
Correct me if I am wrong, but this URAL truck comes with super thirsty petrol v-8 engine, so in hard muddy terrain it use 50-80L/100km
As an upgrade package, they could add a GPS module in the nose extension, with controllable guide fins for precision GPS strikes.
That's not reasonable modernization for grad rocket, to expensive and small effect, for grad are developed new fuses that make him 30% deadly and there are rocket with inertial navigation system
@@vanetu1 Elbit and Roketsan *do* make Grad PGMs, though.
The true reason they are still using it is because they can obtain ammo from Bulgaria, which is the second largest producer in the world of soviet artillery calibers. Do better research WSJ
Because they have it?
Thanks, Wall Street Journal.
Good video
WSJ excellent reporting as always
No they clearly have no clue what they are talking about, they claim the vehicle is obsolete, it is not, they talk about it being armored, it is artillery so not intended to be armored, they talk about lack of precision, it was never designed to be precise. Almost everything they say is out of ignorance on the subject.
If you want to learn about the conflict from someone with some actual knowledge I recommend channels like Perun, a Australian that I believe is a military analyst.
It is anything but excellent reporting.
You dont need Precision if you just hit everything 🤷🏼♂️
WSJ please use metric measurements too for canadians and european viewers
If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid
save yourself 5 mins, because it still launches rockets.
It would be so nice if you could just convert ft to cm for the rest of the world to understand too.
Time to break out the T34s!
The Grad is like a budget HIMARS but you don’t have guided rocket
Why fix what isn't broken. The Soviets have been using this system since 1940 against the Germans with great success.
Soviets used a MLRS made in 1963 against Germans in 1940?
Katjusha mlrs is a simular concept but not the same wapons System.
Arty is arty is arty. That’s why.
Because it takes out a grid square
10 football fields really ?
but i thought the Russians only made useless equipment and shovel .
They are just Artillery rounds with rocket motors but not as precise just they are good for proliferating the target in a short time if lucky enough to be on it.
Because if it throws metal to insane ranges, they need it. That’s why.
dont be afraid...use the metric system
Dnt 4get ,ukrainian army used this rocket launcher on it own ppl aswell
Against seperatist positions yes. And so did the rebells on ukrsinian positions.
Unguided rocked does mean it meats targets complete ty it beed more Rocket to kille inside the area! And easy to reload and cheap to nake even tali an used Grad rockeat
Thank you to the Great USA for helping Ukraine in the fight against Russian fascism! Now, as during World War II, Great America is making a huge contribution to the victory over evil. I don't have enough words to express my gratitude to the people of America. Although I’m not even a citizen of Ukraine, it pains me to look at the injustice that Putler is doing.
Or you just don’t know what’s going on there and what the cause of the conflict is. And when you find out, you will say something completely different.
@@Алексей-ч2ф9л все предельно ясно. Фашистская Россия беспричинно напала на Украину. Яснее некуда.
Is simple really is cheap and goes the job that it needs to do and that is to weaken positions and go back. Yes it is old and becoming outdated but is cheaper than new ones why get one really expensive when you can get a dozen of these you can say ofc that is not accurate but being able to use them more often than never is better than not at all. That is how I see it
In Ukraine we don't have the privilege to choose which weapons we use. We use everything we have to defend against russian invaders.
Russia use grad just fine its important to note Russia generally they dont invest on precise accurate like himas if the rockets are created to use gps they will cost more ; russia they want to reduce cost while still maintaining shear firing power thats their ground attacking doctrine thats why they further developed new grads bm27 rm70. Usa can fire 1 rocket cost while russia can fire 10 cost you pick your option
Russia has precision guided MLRS - the smerch (although only a few of it's missle variants are guided). Grad is just too small in calibre to be comparable to the previous two systems.
=YUP,IT'S SIMPLE AND IT WORKS, HEHEHEHE
=AND,BY THE WAY,THEY DO WHAT HIMARS DONT---THEY CREATE AREA OF A TOTAL DESTRUCTION
Defund Ukraine
4 dead after us plane crash in Norway 🤔 didn’t see that in the news today 1:22
Correction that was last year😅
Can you give us a measurement in Kilometers or Miles? The world doesn't know how big a American football field is.
This propaganda is not aimed at you
Look it up
Same as a soccer feild
Lol. The size of a large stadium basically
Like a golf field minus 5 basketball fields 😂
Very effective against massed attacks- which is how wars were fought in the past. Not so much now, but it is an area denial weapon. It doesn't need to be precise to thwart an advance
Given that the Russians are fighting like it's the 1950's, this thing has a role to play
Yes, it's basically a saturation weapon.
Sure it has a use even today and agienst any military but sure most be so inefficient it's not worth making ammo for it but worth shooting up what there
Every attack has to mass forces. This is why Ukraine is having problems with its counterattack.
@@mitchyoung93 Ukraine is doing an excellent job in this particular battlefield. They're not doing soviet and chinese-style mass wave attacks where this rocket system would excel. Instead, while being slow they are steadily degrading their enemy while keeping losses at a minimum. It is very telling that the russians have not managed to mount any meaningful counter-offensive and has continually lost ground as to how well ukraine's army is doing in over a year
You generally don’t need armor on arty pieces. Even the super nice SPGs don’t have thick armor. It’s actually a lot thinner then most people think.
True. Best defense for SP artillery is mobility, not armour.
Don't need to survive a hit if you're never hit in the first place.
"Ukraine has used Grads against artillery and infrantry, while Russia fires them against cities". Thank you WSJ, peak journalism right there. Totally accurate and unbiased. Definitely an objective view. It's not like Ukraine has fired into Donetsk for 10 years now, or any missiles fell on their own cities recently.
Ah yes, another video trying to tell us how technologically superior western weapons are compared to the Soviet ones (I said Soviet, not Russian, I am NOT pro-russian because I am Romanian and we know what Russia does when it becomes imperialist once again). The Grad is more cost effective than the Himars and, if used for its intended purposes, it will be more deadly. As pointed out in the video, they are supposed to attack and run back. They are used to supress fire, hit large areas like military bases and they also have a role in psychological warfare. However, there are mistakes in the video like for example calling the Ural trucks "unreliable". Alright, maybe the 375D wasn't the greatest, but I haven't really seen those trucks all that often, most of them are Ural 4320 which are better since they have different engines. Then, they try to say that having no armor is a disadvantage. It really isn't, as these MLRS's are not being used too close to the combat area, they are usually placed behind the frontlines.
seriously? why? Ukraine uses everything it has to protect its land
Because a truck that lobs unguided rockets at the enemy is better than no truck at all. I am sure that Ukraine would love to have 200 HIMARS and an unlimited supply of rockets. They don't. So if you have a soviet era truck and a bunch of soviet era rockets. then you use said truck to lobeth said rockets at thy foe, who, not being blessed, shall snuffeth. Book of Armaments, Chapter two, verses 9 through 21.
anything we can get our hands on. bc aint nobody is interested in supplying long rawnge missles and jets. and after almost 2 years and barely any tanks arrived theyve become now useless, since everything is mined
@@patwilson2546 In the second part, the Russians blow up this warehouse of Soviet-era missiles.
@@Алексей-ч2ф9л No, that's a HIMARS missile hitting another Russian supply depot because it's the 21st century and Russians still haven't figured out how logistics work.
the grad rocket has to be without a doubt the most produced rocket in history. I think it will continued to be produced for at least another 50 years.
RPG comes to mind
Now add some guidance to the rockets...it would be menace.
@@OrIoN1989 it’s a good contender and likely we will never know production numbers of either but I’d still wager the 9m22u being more numerous than the pg-7 due to the fact that the pg-7 has been replaced and supplanted by other projectiles like the pg-7V and pg-7L. That’s pedantic though.
@@nuclearwarhead9338 turkey produces such a thing. It’s called the TRG-122.
BM21 is "dear grid coordinates". When you have plenty of those, why not use it to deprive enemy of sleep and ability to safely rotate and evacuate expended units.
Use what you got. Simple concept, easy to understand. Except it seems difficult for people that are not there, have better and believe they would do it differently.
BEWARE! Russian trolls.
ОСТОРОЖНО! Русские тролли.
I think saying it need alot of ammo as bad is undermining the main use of this. If you want restrict enemy movement, you need to surpress them. If you want to surpress them, you need volume, which mean it need alot of it.
Grad is anti area weapon. So regardless if it has new ammo with guidance system or not, when it need to do suppressing fire, it will demand alot of it.
So this aspect is not highlighting how bad the system is, but how bad manufacturing infrastructure that supporting Ukraine is.
Unless Himars has 127mm-180mm munition that can easily produced and delivered to Ukraine, i don't see Grad will be replaced. The cluster munition that used in Ukraine come in very small number that they use only 1 rocket/ engagement. I saw one vid that show how it failed to suppress Russian troops movement.
Tl;dr : no matter how technological advance the system is, when the role demand high number of munition/system, what you need to do is making it as much as you can.
There are also a lot of countries that have stockpiles of grad rockets but not GIMLRs rockets. If Poland, Bulgaria or Albania says "hey we've got some extra grad rockets lying around do you want them?" Ukraine is going to say "yes please" and then send them with haste on to the nearest Russian forces. This is especially important given Ukraine's more limited access to artillery shells and mortars.
We no longer have the industrial capacity in the West to fight a major war. All we can do is send old stuff from our warehouses.
///
WSJ needs to report the Russian Drones. There are plenty of footage out there now.
Ukraine has no more rockets for them. Nobody's making them they're out of ammo 800000 dead, not😂😂😂🎉🎉 much left of Ukraine?
Wow. All of you trolls clsim other numbers. 500k, 600k now 800k.
What is it now
Obsolete? Please 😅😂 the grad will be fighting in coming decades of wars and conflicts
Why? Really? Might be just because Ukraine HAS Grad systems on hand an can use them to fight for survival?!
"Ukraine have used these rockets to attack Russian military targets, whilst Russia have used these rockets to attack civilian targets."
While Russia has used its arsenal against civilian targets numerous times (Grads, cruise missiles, artillery, you name it), the vast majority of Russian weaponry is used against Ukrainian **military targets**. Had the Russians used every grad and artillery piece they had on civilian targets, they would've:
A. Been annihilated by a relatively unharmed Ukrainian Army. (70% of UA's casualties are from Russian artillery!)
B. Levelled every city East of Kiev. (We're talking about millions of artillery shells!)
I'm also sure that Ukrainians have killed Russian civilians, as it is nigh-impossible to fire accurate shots into cities and villages with artillery older than its operators. I'm not saying it was intentional, but it's probably happened.
Donetsk is shelled constantly, it has been like that since 2014 when the war broke out, despite not having military target in the city itself.
Factual reporting. Thanks for correcting the video
Fan of BBC and CNN ? 😂😂
Ah, I have the honor of meeting vadnik and/or russian bot. Can't tell the difference these days tbh, must be growing old.
When Ukraine uses it, it's heroic and good and all that kind of thing. When Russia does it, it's very cowardly and probably a war crime, but very naughty either way. I know this because I have watched a lot of Western left leaning media, and they're so trustworthy, like politicians and used car salesmen.
Czechs added some upgrades to this weapon system, digital fire control, automatic reload, Tatra truck all wheel drive for better off road performance and armoured cabin for crew protection, I think, Ukrainians will like it, it's called RM70 Vampir
Sláva Ukrajině 🇺🇦 from 🇨🇿
Czech engineering is one of the most underrated in the world. Those Tatra monsters are gloriously awesome.
The Ukrainians do love it. I can't remember how many Ukraine have but because of its weight it's much more accurate and it has much tighter grouping. United24 did a video with a crew of a vampir and the crew commander said that it's a force of nature. He said that they only need to fire half a salvo to hit a target. They mostly use it for counter battery fire because it's so accurate and has such tight grouping. There is a clip that shows them hitting an area on the left bank of the dnipro with just half a salvo and it's incredibly effective.
It's probably cost five times more expensive too for having armored cab and bigger truck chasis
@@brookwhiteman9810 thanks mate, I don't even know, how many weapons we've sent, our politicians don't talk about it, but then you see trains loaded with T72 tanks and BMP armoured vehicles, it's obvious where they are heading to.. unfortunately our Soviet weapons are not a game changer, but we do what we can, I actually like, our government doesn't comment on this, we don't need to let the enemy know what we are doing... I wish USA would train Ukrainian soldiers on Apache helicopters, it would help them to demolish ruSSian trenches 😉
The autoloader's usually left empty to minimize chance of cookoffs if a Lancet or FPV drone or arty shell lands nearby, but in other regards, RM70 is a beast in a good sense of word
Companies in some countries are making guided rockets (missiles) for this system. That would be a game changer.
There was way to many "game changers" for Ukraine in the past and yet the game remains the same 😊
@@russiandude6454 the game has changed, but progress is slow.
@@TonyBustaroni when I searched I found Israeli and Turkish companies making them. But Russia would not surprise me.
@@TonyBustaroni Not for Grad, but for Smerch.
"Ukraine have used these rockets to attack Russian military targets, whilst Russia have used these rockets to attack civilian targets." -WSJ
This is just biased and bad reporting, if Russia is truly that incompetent, they would have already been defeated. Ukrainians are not super soldier miracles, go see Russian footages as well to get unbiased views.
Cope
Like Ukraine is not hitting civilians with this indiscriminate tool. But that's ok because they are the goodies. 🙄 BS.
@@bigbake132It's a relevant comment though, in the west we have a media telling us the Russian army is both cruel and incompetent. And still they hold a lot of occupied territory despite Ukraine doing everything they can to repell the invasion at the same time as they have a cart blanched in regard to western equipment.
They are either incompetent, or evil. You can choose which you like better.
@@zwabel That about sums it up sadly.
You’ve made a small mistake in your report. It’s Ukraine who bombarded civilians in cities, not Russia. And if this artillery was outdated in the 90s why it is so widely used? Isn’t it obsolete? As always great journalistic work.
Outdated doesn't mean unusable.
I rsised myy my membership to lieutenant teir. Best i can do for ya homey. Much love from boulder co. Stay up Paul.
Sometimes you just need cheap weapons in quantities. The US is horrible at this doctrine.
Being compared to Mikhail is a compliment🙄 it's definitely a fire for effect type of weapon 🎉🤗
"gives them to the gunman"? Can't the Wall Street Journal find someone who put on a uniform and knows how to salute?
Note the layered propaganda about how Ukraine uses it vs how Russia uses it
This war showed us how outdated the Russians army is. We overestimated their technology. How pathetic to have a slice advantage against Ukraine when you were supposed to by the second army in the world. China number 2, Russia number 20 two step ahead of Ukraine number 22
The Russians may also use the Grad but many of those are upgraded to Tornado G's, they use GLONASS guided rockets. Also this MLRS is comparable to a aerial denial weapon, it's meant to target/suppress large grid coordinates with volume of fire vs Point-systems like Tornado-S/Smerch or HIMARS. It's usage serves a different purpose.
Also on the second point the US has sent Ukraine systems they also use right NOW! like M109 Paladins, M777's, various MRAP's, Bradley's etc. And they've also been destroyed just as easily....
@@gregorylouis617 98% of what we have sent to Ukraine is 30 years old at best. We use some 777 and some armour vehicles but in different context. The difference is we use technology and air superiority. We don’t throw troops to run in open field with no air support and with some inaccurate artillery barrage. Again if Russians were advanced they wouldn’t struggle in Ukraine. Not to be an @$$ but Ukraine is not famous for being a strong military power
@@Sebby6666 lorl like you have any weapons that is built in 2023 or 2013 or 14 still you have same weapons only missile are changing but you launch them from old weapons
@@Sebby6666 " We use some 777 and some armour vehicles but in different context. Umm which vehicles being, the US Army still uses Strykers, M113's, Bradley's, M109's, HIMARS the various MRAP models. The only one I'd argue is some 30 odds years behind will be the M1A1 Abrams tanks they send in. If we're talking about mass, a large majority of the largest militaries ARE comprised of older tech. This modern conventional war isn't like anything the US and NATO has fought in decades. Literally 0 experience in this department, which is why the West started running out of ammo to give the Ukrainians. You think the USA can just never run out of PGM's or something in a large-scale conventional war? It's more cost effective to lob cheap 152mm or 155mm artillery shells, even MLRS dumb rockets, then waste Excalibur or Krasnopol-M's on a target that just needs suppression.
@@gregorylouis617 well if you don’t understand how the USA fight… We don’t fight like Russians or any other countries, we make it seems east because we have a far superiority logistic and technology. Irak was stronger than Ukraine was when the Russians invaded. It’s lot like anything the U.S. fought because we don’t allow any army to pin us down. Now it was stupid to invade other countries, but purely military speaking no other nation can match us. The low munitions are are in are munitions we don’t really use. The Russian struggling in Ukraine only shows us how bad their military is and there is a reason why India and China cancelled their orders.
Blessings, peace and luck from California to Ukraine 🙏🙏✌🍀💙💛
They use drone to target, once it launch to exact coordinate nothing can escape the salvo radius even modern tank/vehicles.
This level of journalism is amature at best
this imperial unit killed me.
They use it because they have it. I would too.
Well the main thing for me is the looks and rapid fire. Looks awesome when its firing
Quantity beats quality.
"Ukraine uses it to hit mostly Russian artillery and infantry, Russia uses it to hit cities like Kharkiv." Mind blowing use of selectively biased language here. Unguided rockets hit whatever is in their way. They have no guidance, that's the point. Both sides aim it at their opponents forces and both side's rockets end up hitting civilian structures. This is truly an "our noble warriors, their barbarian hordes" moment.
Because when you aim an unguided mlrs into a civilian city, you are guaranteed to hit civilians which is the same as targeting them as well.
Ukraine uses it mostly closer to the frontline. Otherwise you’d see 50000 videos from every single angle of a single strike into a major city like Donetsk for example.
@@oleksii000when you hide inside civilians areas using every building to your advantage and have thousands of troops in an area, you make yourself the target for artillery of all types.
You still aim the thing -- being off by a full kilometer at the 50km range still demands deliberate aiming at a city to hit it. "Unguided" is not the equivalent of giving a toddler an espresso shot and a puppy, it just translates to a dispersal area that's larger than the blast zone of a single impact.
“Unguided rockets hit whatever is in their way.” So who’re the ones pointing them at cities and civilian centers then?
@@regalplays7135hmm hiding in civillan area itself make that legitimate target
Obselet is you lady
I'll also add that on radar, the unguided rockets are identical to the guided rockets fired by HIMARS. So it's good to fire unguided rockets alongside guided rockets to act as decoys. The enemy has no reliable way to differentiate between the two, so even if they have the means to intercept them, they are unlikely to intercept the guided rocket over the unguided ones.
when they fire an expensive big missile like SCALP or Storm Shadow, im sure they send a lot of lesser missiles and drones ahead of them to exhaust the air defence on junk. Probably why they always hit what they intend to hit with the main missiles.
That is accurate. They do a lot of prodding into the enemy's defenses to determine the best mix of drone, missile, guided/unguided before going for a significant target. In the last few months Russia has blamed the destruction of their airfields and ammunitions on the use of storm shadows. Only for Ukraine to say nah, it was this 30 year old cluster missile that did it. @@dennisbradley5620
AK 47 is just one of those guns that you just can’t get enough of in 90 years later you’ll still see AK-47s being used that’s how good of a rifle that is
Why fix it when it ain't broke that's the motto
Not really, at least if you mean the AK-47 specifically. AK pattern rifles are ubiquitous, but nowadays you'll find fewer and fewer actual AK-47s because there are newer variants such as AKM, AK-74 and AK-12.
@@BlueBockser you’ll mostly see a case ak47s with terrorists like isis and more since it’s the cheapest weapon ever built
It's cheap. Mass produced. Durable. Russia has developed newer and better variants of it from my understanding. I don't know if it's the AK107. No recoil. But in small numbers
Why is it OK for Ukraine to use unguided rockets, but when Palestinians use unguided rockets people complain how barbaric they are for using them? Am I seeing a double standard here?
Palestinians have civilians as their target. Not civilians casualties while targeting militants. They actually target civilians. It isn't their weapon choice that is complained about.
because the media and politics back israel. the palestinian struggle is legitimate though :(
@@goldengun9970 its partly that the rockets are pretty terrible for accuracy, and you need a large target to hit something.
@@specialingu no. They specifically fire into cities with no military target at all. Aim is to kill civilians. Target us the civilians. Not a military target and not minding that civilians are killed. The civilians are their target
Other way around. Ukraine has been pumping these missiles into eastern Ukraine for years.
And seperatists where firing them on ukrainians in donbass
@@sH-ed5yf like separatists in Kosovo or Taiwan? No. Ukrainians started this.
So it didn't work, but it worked, so it stuck around for another war...
On a Viking cemetery on Greenland they found a body with a stone weapon between his ribs. It may have been the brother of Leif, named Thorvald? The only one from the Sagas that we know died in America. But the fact is, that you are just as dead when being hit with this weapon, as with an iron weapon.
Most vehicles and their crews will not survive an anti-tank mine. This is a shortcoming of that rocket launcher. Some armored US vehicles aren't mine resistant. Along as Ukraine can get rockets for these vehicles, they are worth using in some circumstances.
You don't go to war with the weapons you want. You go with the weapons you have.
Cause its better than nothing
Seriously? It's because Ukraine still has a lot of them left. Why not use anything you can when you are outnumbered 10-1 just so you can stand your ground.... Russia has way more of these.
Why are Human Rights Organizations your source for Industrial Capacity.
That’s nuts.
This is a mobile field artillery( same as 120mm mortars and howitzers.)
These are meant to provide accurate artillery support for infantry officers. The officers radio in the location they need it and the team does the calculations to set the target. They are accurate enough to provide “danger close” fire support. There are 3 factors which affect the accuracy
1. The age and quality of the rocket. This is beyond Ukraine’s control. They just use what they get
2. The training the soilders have with this system and their experience. This would determine if they provide “danger close” support or just pre engagement bombing.
3. A high level of understanding of the battlefield( eg terrain and weather)
In the hands of an experienced and well trained team these are both accurate and deadly(that’s something Ukrainians lack as it’s not a system which u can just pick up and go)
About it being undivided, almost all artillery are unguided, putting in guidance increases the cost over 10x that’s why all military still use these type of “unguided” systems as they provide soldiers on the front lines quick artillery support.
Similar rocket systems are used in Apache helicopters. And the USA has coined a term for acceptable civilian deaths as “ collateral damage”.
How much does one of the common rockets for the grad cost?
@@alpinestuff8377 no clue, a rocket is just chemicals with a compression trigger. But guidance systems are a whole different ballgame. Just look at the complexity of a computer vs a typewriter. The rockets are typewriters.
ive wondered how much of the area effect is from the vehicle rocking as it fires off the salvo.. would you get significantly tighter grouping with using stabilizers like a crane has?
@@specialinguIt's not rocking that hard. Rockets unlike bullets or artillery shells have almost zero recoil.
Recoiless rifle shot at a long distance
These rockets aren't good against armor at all but it can kill soldiers and is a scare tactic weapon not meant to start a war but to give signals to the other side we're still here.
They're either too short range or hitting too small objects and in truth you would need to upscale it with bigger explosions to have an effect. They're not using the war criminal chemicals these weapons were constructed to use. They're outdated rockets shot away like a rifle and then they ask for more ammo which provide more income to both ukraine and the weapon suppliers. They use it because it's cheap and there's plenty of countries who see no threat of an outdated weapon in a meaningless war where they are waiting for putin to die by old age.
Even if Ukraine would be supplied with the best artillery they wouldn't be able to use it since they have no way to move the frontier forward.
无人机让它鸟枪换炮，老牛吃嫩草
Always making unnecessary Noise and Which Rocket Launcher Russia doesn't have
Talks out how Ukraine is soending the money the US provided WSJ 🦓
i once stubled upon one of those rockets, live, just lying on the ground,. that was in the southern Libyan desert, i guess it fell out of one of those chech 8x8 launchers the Libyan army had. the wires were ripped off halfway.
Egypt has agreed to supply Ukraine with grad rockets. Is a common weapon.
even the WSJ now converts everything to friggin football fields?
How about at least mentioning the purpose of these shitboxes?
- area denial
- combating troop concentrations
- saturation fire
Ukraine is literally doing so much for United States of America
I'm amazed that the Grad can hit something as close as 32 feet away - I supposed that happens when the rocket doesn't ignite and falls out of the launcher?? Or are you referring to kill radius, instead of range?
I saw that too and was equally frustrated.
In day and age, countries have guided SAMs but not guided rocket artillery, that's a sham..
"Russia often attack kherson with it" google some donetsk bombardment, genius.