I was actually working on Ft. Sill when these were being tested. In fact, I was working on patrol the day they were supposed doing the first live airborne test of a combat loaded HIMARS. Instead they decided to touchdown at the airfield on post after they had dropped all the airborne troops out the sides. I was blocking a main road near the DZ, got to watch one guy bounce! Think he had a broken leg was all but his chute definitely streamered.
about time someone showed this. Theres a bunch of military statistics channels who claims that Canada doesn't have any self propeled rocket projectors. (rocket artillery vehicles) Such as VSB Defence for example.
He never said that the Canadian military *have* these systems. In fact some quick Google-fu reveals that they in fact no longer have any rocket artillery. Furthermore, Matt himself even did a video about the retirement of the Canadian self propelled Howitzers, literally all that’s left are the towed field guns. So VBS Defense would be correct if they stated that the Canucks didn’t have an MLRS type platform.
Back in the 1980s when I was stationed at Grafenwöhr the MLRS and 155 tracked Artillery would emplace themselves along our Tac-site fence line. (I was in a HAWK unit) And when they fired they rocked our world quite literally. When the 155 fired you would actually miss a step while walking. Good times.
During the 1st Gulf War we watched a whole battalion of M270's fire all their rockets in a few minutes. They stretch towards the horizon. It was surreally beautiful.
I dont think its that much of an Drawback that HIRMAS has only half the Payload of the M270-MLRS, because of the quick reload. Also, the most limiting Factor for Rocket-Artillery is probably Logistics.
The early MLRS took a couple minutes for it to go from the stowed position to slewed onto the target area, so mass volley fire to prevent counter battery was definitely a big thing. The HIMARS and updated MLRS both are capable of from stowed to target area & back to stowed seconds and as such I don’t think it’s as big of an issue. I believe it’s probably quicker to get back on the move after firing for a good shoot and scoot. Maybe leave the MLRS (in NATO/allies usage) for primarily the ATACMS instead of GMLRS.
@@soonerfrac4611 I have not served on an MLRS System, but just by the short Time it needs to reload and shoot off all its Rockets. There must be a lot of traffic going on to supply these Sytems, just imagine a hole Battery, how much tonnage and volume they can go through in just one Day. Especially if u look at the size and weight of these Missle's.
a very sound remark from gOtze 1337 - in my view. What is happening with HIMARS is that heavy artillery is back at the brigade level. The M110 205 mm is one clumsy beast. With a shell weight of 100 kg and 50-60 kg fpr the charge. Not only do you need a crew of 13 and a support vehicle PR. GUN. You allmost need engineering support to load the damned thing. Rate of fire was 3 rounds pr TWO minutes in "burst". "Sustained" fire 1 round every two minutes. With that rate of fire the enemy could get a squadron of Lancasters airborne..... What did it achieve? A paltry 30-40 km range with its snub nosed 37 caliber tube. Let's say: Hardly worth the effort. It is true that the rocket projectiles of the HIMARS are a LOT more expensive, but if they hit the objective it is well worth the price. I would like the HIMARS put on a larger truck chassis so they can have suitable crew accomodation, as they are going to be on the road 24/7 - if for nothing else to reload from a local airfield.
In terms of tonnage, artillery - be it rocket or grenade - is by far the most taxing item for any logistics train. I remember hearing that around 60-80% of the weight capacity is used for those units - but they are also responsible for around the same ratio of enemy casualties, so it's worth the effort.
There are combat scenarios with HIMARS that go way out of box for artillery. For example that a HIMARS will link with other assets and shoot against ships or that F-35s will be designating targets to the HIMARS to engage.
I heard the same thing from a guy's who's son manned such a system. He got to see a live fire demonstration. Said the same thing. Insanely loud and impressive as hell.
There is room for both rocket and gun/tube artillery on the peer v peer battlefield of today and tomorrow. Cost is still a limiting factor when it comes to fielding assets in peace time. That alone will ensure the continuation of 155mm guns in the armed forces. There is a distinct possibility that the lines between self propelled artillery and main battle tanks could become blurred. If 130mm, 140,, or 150mm + tank tubes become the norm. It only requires an autoloading turret with high angles of elevation. For an MBT to fulfil the indirect fire role. It all depends which compromises military procurement choose to make.
Also, the 155mm is an operational level asset, yet HIMARS and GMLRS systems can also be used to bridge the operational-strategic gap. Case in point, Ukraine annihilating enemy ammunition dump, bridges, EW systems, and rail freight carrying engineering vehicles. These are strikes which bridges the gap between operations and strategy.
Gus: Exactly, the two types of artillery complement each other. You can't really do sustained fire support from rocket artillery that it where tube artillery excels. In a high intensity conflict, one of the first critical missions for rocket artillery will be to take out the opponent's counter-battery assets (radar, sound-detection, etc.) to enable towed or SP tube artillery to then provide sustained fire support. However, not every military is going to be fighting a high-intensity conflict; there are low to medium intensity conflicts where towed tube artillery is sufficient.
@@mattwarner8273 Yes, it would be interesting to see which choice is made for a MBT expected to fulfil an artillery role. It's always going to be a compromise but things seem to be moving that way already. With both wheeled and tracked IFV's sporting MBT calibre weapons in tank like turrets.
We were working on a duel rocket cartridge for this system back around 2005 at Ray The On. We could fit two rockets into each; not the 6 or 1 options you've seen, It might be for home use only and not even sent to Iraq or Afghanistan. We've had a lot of trouble selling top of the line stuff to Japan and Israel (most publicized) and others that land up on Chinese runways, thus the F-22 wasn't exported. These two rockets out performed the single rocket in range and in a lot of other ways. I know it was purchased in quantity so it was approved after I left the program, as we were just working on the engineering sample(s) at the earlier date. I remember reading about it online, so it isn't a super secret anymore, but the spec's might be.
The Israeli's do have the m270 mlrs, maybe 70 of them, but they decided to expand the amount of rockets they could launch seeing a need for smaller and larger guided rockets. So they took the launcher mechanism off the m270 and put it on a truck that could mix up to 3 different types of rockets at a time.
@@Shaun_Jones That's the one I bet, because I remember something about the range and being astonished. Again, I was more into manufacturing it and the end cost so what I knew was limited to parts and logistics to build the MF'er.
Romania bought 54 himars even before russia invaded ukraine.And they already received the first units.The contract got a loot of flack bc it was expensive and considered unnecesary but after how they perform in ukraine a lot of people(not russian trolls) changed their opinion.
And how do you know well in Ukr ?! CNN told you and , you obvious you believe all BS right ? Cuz ALL the evidence we saw until now, were some piss poor little holes of 25cm in a bridge pavement ... Do not let the murican pitch sale BS obscure your perspective, dude . Murica have all the interest to inflate the numbers and qualities, since many murican colonies will pay big bucks for it.( romenia included, :p )
@@tonyvu2011 - those "many peoples" are lazy ignorant who never bother to educate themselves in the situation of Donbass since 2014. Sadly, those ignorant have no clue about the drama and tragedy the peoples of Donbass suffer in last 8 years at the hands of ukronazi and Kiev regime. 14 000 killed in last 8 years, and several thousands more since 2022.
It is pretty cool for an older guy to hear about the advancement of weapons over time... It is really Cool (and kinda funny) to see a young man like Mat (especially for the folks who have watched his channel since way before he was old enough to enlist), realizing that the current weapons will have the rookies of the very near future calling him an 'Old-Timer' about Artillery! And as funny as that sounds, when it happens, Mat is gonna feel pretty damn proud inside. He'll probably fuss and tell them to Knock that Sh*t Off... But he will be proud of being an 'Old Timer' that knows how Fire missions are calculated and executed (and Not by some damn Machines!)... Nice video, Take Care Mat and Everyone, John
I feel like having worked in an era where computers have been employed to deadly results it would be a weird thing to turn around and denigrate them, like a pilot saying radar is bad because it's computerised
@@purplefood1 I completely agree with you about using the best technology available. I also know that a Retired friend of mine was a Navigator on a B52 during the Cold War. He said that every mission they flew in training included a 'leg' of the flight plan that utilized 'celestial navigation' (using the stars through the observation port). Those 'Damn Machines' is an older guys Joke for the RELIANCE on just the technology and not teaching things like Celestial Navigation whether it's to a bomber Navigator or Sailors on Ships. Technology is a great thing, but it can 'Dumb people down' some. A perfect example is telephone numbers. You used to pickup the handset and you just automatically dialed the number of whoever you were thinking about calling. Now, most people, couldn't call anyone if their cellphone was broken or lost. I think that the Technology is great. I just appreciate the teaching and learning of the skills that work when the technology doesn't. Think EMP here! Ya'll Take Care and be safe, John
@@JohnDoe-pv2iu I mean that's patently untrue, people had personal phonebooks and general phonebooks for looking up numbers if they weren't one of the handful they could recall off the top of their head, literally no one remembered every number for everyone they ended up calling. Also it's a terrible example because it's not like people can't remember things anymore there's just very little reason to try and remember every phone number when they're stored and retrieved so easily. Navigation by stars or calling in artillery is an actual learned skill that you need to teach and I do agree it's worthwhile teaching those skills but they are taught skills not knowing them doesn't make you dumber it makes you untrained. Acting like computers are dumbing people down is ignoring how people are actually working with computers, if you want to be safe in the case of an EMP (for some reason) then teach the older skills as well but let's not pretend they're even remotely as good as what we have these days.
SPH range is also increasing. XM1299 SPH that are to replace the M109s has already hit a target 72 km away using XM1113 RAP rounds in a demonstration. It may even hit further at 100km+ using XM1155 ramjet rocket rounds.
@@stinopharan5528 They've also tried Excalibur but it can only go as far as 65km which is not bad as its not a RAP round. The closest SPH to have hit a similar range is South African G6-52 and German PzH 2000 at 67km using special RAP rounds.
Did 7 years in a HIMARS unit including one deployment to Afghanistan in support of a JSOC task force. We didn't shoot a lot. But when we did all of Bagram Airfield payed attention. Got to the point that whenever we were at the firing point, which you could see from the end of the flight line, a bunch of Airman would sit on their side of the fence for awhile to wait and see if we were going to shoot.
In 2016, when I was part of Operation Atlantic Resolve, we were part of an exercise in Poland (I was in the 10th BEB from Raider [1st Brigade, from the 3In Division based out of Fort Stewart in the US]) and I remember one day when we were setting up in the massive dome type tents near the training site, and we were bringing in the six pack liter bottles of water, and I was super tired and delirious. We had been awake for at least three days basically on our convoy from Graf in Germany to the training site in Poland. The officers were helping because it was all hands on deck and we needed to hurry up and get settled in so we could prepare for the training exercise. I started laughing, and the company commander CPT Berreth looks over at me and says " What's funny, Wirth?" We had a pretty close relationship as I was his gunner at the time and I had been his driver before. I said, "Sir it's not funny, I promise." And he insists that I say what's funny. So I held the six pack of liter bottles of water over my head and said, " Look Sir, I'm a HIMARS!" I then proceeded to pretend to fire rockets over my head with exceptional sound effects. Needless to say, he and the other officers looked at me, shaking their heads in disbelief, and i was deeply embarassed. 10/10 would do it again
I think HIMARS used with M1299 Extended Range Cannon Artillery "ERCA" is the balance needed on the battlefield. ERCA rounds are cheaper to produce compared to HIMARS.
I found the short clip of a HIMARS truck chained to the deck of a USN warship interesting, and a proof-of-concept for extended-range ordinance that can be deployed in a contested area like the South China Sea. I would think the DoD is already looking into non-traditional platforms that can carry HIMARS to offset some of the established advantage the PLAN has created with its AAAD approach within the first island chain, reflecting the doctrinal shift back to supporting amphibious operations in hostile environments where air/naval supremacy by US assets may not be assured.
The US navy doesn’t even have to operate within the first island chain. There can be 6 or 7 super carriers along with a few light carriers launching air craft to destroy China’s navy airforce and the Chinese fleet. They would be supported by land based aircraft launching from Japan and Guam. The US has far more 5th generation jets than China and far more 4th generation jets as well. It wouldn’t be too difficult to destroy their airforce and air defense SAMs
Using rockets on ships is not new to the USN. Recall the rocket LSTs of WW2. Considered, if you will (sorry, my inner Rod Sterling coming out), a “sort of stealthy” littoral combat ship (either class) speeding within range, losing a guided salvo, getting the hell away. Hard hit, hard to see coming, hard to see running away. Will it happen?
@@tylerclayton6081 You're presenting a very optimistic scenario that seems disturbingly out of touch with current force projection estimates regarding the strength and depth of the PLAN AAAD system already in place, and which is supported by a maritime combined arms force of relatively new, modern cruisers (even though the the Chinese refer to the Type 55 as a 'destroyer'), destroyers and submarines operating close to their home logistical bases. The PLAN supports a fairly large "grey navy" of fishing boats which can probably be equipped in short order with box-type launchers to saturate the USN air defense capabilities of the 2-3 carrier strike groups that can be committed immediately, and the other 3-4 that may take as long as 3 weeks to arrive on station. You're also assuming that China doesn't incapacitate Guam, Diego Garcia and Yokosuka, which will be the bases supporting US and allied operations. Long-range PGMs are essential elements in a response to potential Chinese aggression, and we need significant numbers that can be deployed on diversified platforms.
As a spectator, it would seem that the HIMARS has a particular use case. Small precise, long range artillery, shoot and scoot. It seems complementary to a battery of howitzers who can lay down persistent fire across a wide area, albeit at a closer range. It wish would seem that 2 HIMARS systems are far more versatile and resilient than one M270 MLRS.
I remember sat waiting at the start line for the 1st UK armoured division assault during OP Granby (Desert Storm)watching the MLRS and artillery bombardment, along with the Aerial bombardment Thinking to myself thank the lord I’m on this side. But for sustained long term artillery support the howitzers are hard to beat. For dash and bash runs these are the cats ass for sure. These and along with the fire and forget anti tank missile systems have been a game changer for the current war in Ukraine 🇺🇦.
I too was a kid, my dad was the XO of an American wild weasel squadron in Germany at the time. Our fighters were some of the very first non F-117’s into enemy territory. In fact, I believe they were not even allowed to engage enemy aircraft BVR until a specific time to ensure that they didn’t accidentally target a Nighthawk returning from Baghdad.
I would like to add a note regarding why HIMARS is better than M270, mobility wise. To put it simply, it requires less ass. Lighter, more fuel efficient, highly mobile on and off road, helicopter slingable, C130 packable button punching badassery. But seriously, ever seen tracks operate too independently of wheeled supply? Me neither.
@@alfaeco15 Doable - at least for approx. constant speed movement in straight line. After all they've already proven it on a ship. And yes, the ship was moving - that was the idea. Took couple of software upgrades. Question is rather whether such software wouldn't be too big, if you also have to have extensive map database etc. Given that apart from "1GB capacity" we don't know what is the capacity of HIMARS system. Computationally also harder, so just like with capacity upgrade might be required, but it isn't that much harder, given that a lot of the burden would still be on missile itself. Question is how often do they update their position and how long does it take to update it. If it is more than couple of seconds, then it might be too much for the missile to correct - perhaps slower barrage?
Thanks for this, I can see this as a very effective weapon. It can be carried on a C 130, can be deployed within minutes of landing, can fire and move within minutes, requires less skill to operate and would be ideally linked to drone surveillance of the target, which can be apparently hit with a very accurate missile. It can then drive 100km to the next location and be ready again. The only issue I can see is the cost of each missile.
Amazon will sell these for $5 million includes 6 free rockets. If you are on Amazon Prime we will deliver this the same day by our own fleet of C-130 delivery planes
@@JoeyC777 Yes because he is an active member of the armed forces and it is against rules. If he was not in the military he would probably have a gold mine covering the war (and would be my number one go to source of information), but he is a good man with principles first and that is worth a ton of respect in my view.
That's the difference between eastern warfare and western warfare, Easter relay on numbers and volume of fire power, like 30, 60 years ago, the west relay on precision, range, pin point accuracy and speed, HIMARS is good example, HIMARS doesn't need a 12+ missile launcher when it can use high precision missiles that can hit further than any eastern MLRS of similar characteristics
yeah the major difference is, that the west uses smaller more "elite" forces, expecting to get away with it, while former eastern block nations know, that once shit hits the fan, people start to die and equipment gets destroyed. During the cold war, sovjet MBT were in most aspects similarly capable or surperior to western MBT with exception to the optronics, wich were slightly, but only slightly, worse. The sovjets pitted about 7-10 MBT against each NATO MBT. Guess who would have won WW3 in 1980. It would not have been NATO.
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 in a conflict, ground forces don't mean shit when you don't have air superiority, like we see right now with Russia in Ukraine and NATO always stand out for that doctrine, it's doesn't matter how many tanks or SPG you can have if the enemy knows where ar you ging and what are you gonna do your numbers worth little more.
@@ME262MKI well, what's the other thing, Russia today is really big in besides artillery? And the sovjet union back then too. Multi layered air defense. Sovjet union has back in the day, just like Russia today, one if not the strongest air defense capability of the world. You can't really use your air power VS that
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 how can you shoot what you cannot see? the US has the best electronic warfare craft in the world, and the ability to hit air defense before it can even react. HARM's, JSOW's, and a plethora of other items meant to deal specifically with this supposedly superior air defense.
@@shimakazef.7809 dude for every air defense system nato brings to the field, russia brings 50. and those are not shitty 50´s systems but pretty modern systems too. During the cold war, NATO would have faced a no fly zone over central europe, so air surperiority would have been gone. stealth aircraft like F-22 are a thing of the 90´s. Until then you would have faced russian air defense with standart non stealth jets. Even today, Russias air defense capabilities are more or less the strongest of the world and they can deny air acess to the eastern baltic sea and parts of europe, even to the US. Every anti air emplacement operation (wild weasel) would suffer massive casualties. guess how long the US or NATO can keep wild weasel missions running, when they loose 1/3 of aircraft each mission? Thats why the great emphasis on artillery was made during the cold war by both sides. You cant expect to have air surperiority or even limited air support and your ground forces will face an equal or surperior enemy on the ground. the solution: massed artillery. tube and rocket. btw do you really think, that russia and china do not have EWAR systems and do not have them en masse? How will you engage enemy radar positions, if you get permanently jammed and engaged with very long range AA missiles that are capable of engaging Targets 400km away?
They were retired because they had an unacceptable dud rate, and there isn’t really a fix to guarantee that the tens of thousands of submunitions have perfect reliability.
HIMARS is now, I wonder what is waiting around the corner for the next generation of long-range rocket artillery. While watching this video I was thinking if HIMARS doctrine is attacking the enemy beyond the forward edge of the front line, or does it really have the capability to be used in close support of troops in contact.
ukraine could use a longer range precision missle now, to take out that bridge that connects crimea and russia. the russians are sending a lot of munitions across that bridge, and if taken out it would HELP UKRAINE IMMENSELY, maybe even getting russia to leave even sooner!
I once found a picture of MLRS inside the Turbo bubble gum. They usually put photos of super cool cars like Lambo or Vector but that one time, it was MLRS and it looked like the future was already here.
If it has a range of over 50km or 70km it may have burned out before it gets above the radar horizon. If it is GPS guided it can fly a non ballistic shaped path to confound back tracking radar. In any case the HIMARS could relocate before the missiles even hit the ground and counter battery fire has commenced.
@@williamzk9083 dude, counter battery radar is ground scanning radar. there is next to no radar horizon today. ground surveilance radar is used to pick up ground targets for artillery, air strikes, long range missile strikes etc
The forward operating base and field guns being setup is fine... as long as you're fighting insurgents or lower tier forces. But against a near peer adversary yes, emplaced field guns are in need of going the way of the dodo.
But not every military is fighting a high intensity conflict. Even then, it is really difficult to provide sustained fire support using rocket artillery; as others have said once you fire your pod, you have to move, drop off your old pod/reload a new one and relocate to the next firing position; there is a break in firing. There will be a mix of rocket and tube artillery, and some of that tube artillery will be towed and some will be SP's; they complement each other.
@@Bob_Betker I dont have any issue with tube artillery, but towed artillery I think may be nearing the end of its service life when it comes to any sort of high intensity near peer conflict. Its just not survivable enough when fighting an enemy that has persistent surveillance and counter battery radars. Like Sooner said, the Hawkeye 105mm sp system looks good, and I dont know the price but if it can be had for ~near~ the same price as a regular M119 then thats def the way to go. Same for the 155mm/M777, skip the expensive/finicky autoloader system, mount the gun on some sort of heavy duty wheeled platform with a recoil reducing system like the Hawkeye and install an auto laying system so you can get in complete your fire mission and get out quick. Sort of like the CAESAR. Keep the price down so you can acquire enough to outfit nearly the entire force. CAESAR looks good, but Ive heard they're nearly as expensive as full tracked self propelled gun. Same for Archer...
@@mmeade9402 Well at least with the archer crew doesnt have to poke out , and it can be operated with only 1 crew if need be. Reload is done by another vehicle & crew so it would be sustainable. All these nice features drives up the cost , but I rather have mobile arty then anything that drones can drop DIY hand grenades on and take out the entire crew.
I was on Kandahar air field in 2010 when they fired these off. It was intense. None of us normal folk knew what was really going on. Just hearing those rockets screaming by.
How does counterbattery fire locate rocket artillery? I'd imagine that modern guided rocket artillery missiles could be programmed to make a few early 'random' course corrections before following a ballistic arc so that any enemy radar further downrange which attempts to back trace that ballistic arc will wind up targeting some empty ground 1/2 mile (or whatever) away from the actual firing point.
But the missiles have to do the random course correction before they are picked up on radar then, and aggressive course correction at the beginning steals range like nothing else. So the GMLRS rockets are said to do the regular ballistic arc in the beginning, and then flatten out the curve on the way down, thus extending their range, and probably making counter battery calculations a little harder too.
@@benghazi4216 Fair point. I guess the targeting/firing solution computers could automatically scale an early course correction based on target range so that on closer targets could throw off any counter battery attacks to a decent degree, whereas a target at the limit of your range you wouldn't be able to waste any rocket fuel to try and obfuscate your firing position using this method.
The M31 doesn't really have a normal ballistic curve it either strikes in a 90 degree angle from 10km height or in an angle to the target. And because of that it can't be seen by counter radar
The old way was directional microphones hooked up to oscilloscopes. The time difference of arrival of the gun fire sounds could be used to calculated the position of the artillery. You could possibly also pick up the shockwaves of the shells I imagine. Modern systems would be computerized.
Next thing you know, soldiers will be playing REDCON irl lol And speaking of the future, regarding the guided systems and what not, it also reminds me of another game, Warzone 2100, it had an extensive focus on Radar/Fire support/Counter-battery. It worked pretty simply afaik, just link said fire support to a radar (stationary or mobile) and keep them in range and you got artillery dominating the battlefield that easy! Though from what I could remember of my limited time playing it was a real pain trying to get Radar/Artillery up if your enemy already has established Sensors n Howitzers.
For long range, precision strikes, HIMARS arguably has no equivalent. However, it is relatively high cost when compared to conventional artillery i.e. One HIMARS missile= 150,000 usd, one 155 mm shell=400 usd.
I think a conventional artillery shell must be more like $4000/round. GPS guided munitions fired from a top end long range Self Propelled Howitzer such as the PzH 2000 must be equally powerful. A PzH 2000 can time and adjust firing angles. to enure that 6 155mm shells hit at the same time.
@@williamzk9083 I stand corrected, still a considerable difference, not as readily available as conventional artillery shells and therefore used for different purposes i.e long range, high-value targets
And there's still a place for the original cluster warhead. Because of its long range and precision, a few HIMARS were able to cover territory in Afghanistan that would have required numerous tube arty fire bases.
hey Matsimus been following your channel for a bunch of years l, I'm trying to get into the CAF and wondering if you could do a video on CAF drill instruction, thanks!!
HIMARS first of all is effective due to its extremely accurate GPS guided rockets. That gives a single rocket an effect comparable to several salvoes from an entire traditional artillery bataljon - if not much more when it comes to actually destroying the target and not just keeping it down - at at 2-3 times the range of traditional artillery! That also gives a huge logistic advantage as you can achieve a given amount of firepower with just a fraction of the supplies and manpower. A single very mobile launcher vehicle is also much less vulnerable than big traditional artillery units. In that context even the 16 vehicles in Ukranian service so far represent a tremendous firepower and if they achieve the 50 systems whished for (should be possible) the Russian army will be in big trouble. Anything they deploy west of the Dniepr river risk being cut off and crushed.
As awsome as the MLRS is especially where it is in such need today,🇺🇦, the good old boom sticks will still be king of the battle field, probably see even longer range artillery in the future, it augments the howitzers great, but grunt is always going to need to be able to call in fire at moment notice for economical price with devastating effects. My 2 cents...cheers👍
also tom many computers can be a problem if they have a virus or emp is used then they are in the dark i wonder if it has manual launch function or if it is all computerised.
The comment about crew morale is interesting, if a platform is more enjoyable to use & creates a good team atmosphere that is a subtle value to consider from the top desks... but, survivability & effectiveness are even better for overall morale & ultimate objectives...
150k$ gps guided rocket, so a salvo of 6 costs 1mil$. However, the high cost is due to very low production volume of the rockets and the design is pretty "new", electronics components inside it is very expensive with such a low volume. I have read somewhere that even US stockpile only has bought total appx 50000 rounds since 2010s, and US has only used 1/3 of that number in about 15 years. Now with the thing in Ukraine, suddenly "real war" is possible everywhere, nations start buying both the HIMARS/MLRS and the guided rocket ammunition, cost should reduce quickly with such high demand.
I swear iu want one just to say i have one. roll up at the club, at the BBQ, to a house party. No one would mess with me cause you know i can bring the smoke.
Video suggestion: with the success of HIMARS regarding precision, meaning less of a burden on logistics, how will it evolve? Is it for every country? It's expensive which will discourage some armies. Is it modular so that the launcher and cockpit could be put on another brand without that much extra cost? Germany might prefer Mercedes,m Sweden Volvo, Italy Iveco etc.
It's extremely expensive and very slow to reload, requiring more support vehicles than the new wheeled NLOS artillery systems that several countries develop. Russias 2C351, FLOX and malva artillery are already being fielded in Ukraine - several dozen, compared to the 4 himars they have left
@@pteppig malva is mortal systemi dont know if they even start production. Floks is for sure not even produced yet they want start production on late of 2022
@@pteppig It takes less than 10 minutes to reload the HIMARS system. And each GMLRS comes in at around $160k, not a bad cost when you consider each one of these missiles can be guided in on independent targets with extreme precision.
@@pteppig So Flox is a mortar and Malva just a wheeled Pion? They're nowhere near the capability of HIMARS. Also HIMARS are the launcher vehicle and then a reload transporter. You know, like every fucking artillery system ever.
Wow.....with the NVG you can see that sometimes the rocket ignites slowly and then goes off. Sometimes it's a slow burn. I bet they don't really want that.
I would not be terribly surprised if the next generation of upgrades for artillery will include drones. It should be quite possible for individual firing vehicles, or towed guns, to have their own drones so that if need be they can do their own forward observing for quicker response instead of depending on information coming down the chain of command.
Not really necessary, there is so much data coming from drones, sensors and other sources that you need a centralized capacity to filter and prioritize everything.
The US has announced a new tranche of weapons for Ukraine’s forces, including ammunition for increasingly important rocket launchers and artillery guns. The new $550m package will “include more ammunition for the high mobility advanced rocket systems
@@Biden_is_demented The Germans have recently sent x3 but like all proxy wars the true numbers of weapons flowing into ones country are never known , most of the announcements are phycological in nature , as for game changers , one needs to look at its capability as an individual surgical strike weapon, or operating in a battery, highly manoeuvrable and extremely hard to counter fire against , the Russians do not posses anything as good, more so its mix of rocket ammunition , the aim now for the UDF is to hit the rear echelon area of Russian forces, disrupting their logistical bases and command and control , all in reach of the highly accurate HMARS .As for your presence part, one needs to understand that this proxy war is different , it is highly advanced and Ukraine has a blank cheque book guaranteed by the west and others , Putin got away with Crimea, he will not be allowed to get away with this unprovoked and unwarranted attack on another sovereign country and for sure will pay a heavy price for it , and as most credible countries have stated, must never be allowed to continue with his bad acting in the region ever again ! which means folks are done with him !
They will be effective as long as there is no proper mechanism to intercept the missles. With its high demand for it now, you can be sure that militaries around the world will be spinning to find ways to counter these systems effectively. If it can be done, regular artillery will reign once again, since you cannot really intercept the projectiles from that.
Bro, I love your channel but change the intro music back to the original. It's not that the new one is bad, but the old one from a few years ago was cool.
Imagine if they had one of these next to a bunch of regular artillery and someone had the bright idea of seeing if the rockets work in the regular artillery? Also watching this video with subtitles had the name come out as 'high Mars'
Another big thing they have against counter fire is they can take a flight path to specifically evade counter tracking, rockets go out then up. This has been observed in Ukraine
Allows for a gigabyte of data 😂 Was built in the early 2000s alright. Considering firing solutions take up basically no storage though, I’m sure it doesn’t make any practical difference. Really an amazing feat of engineering all around
@@Jarandjar considering the time frame when they were designed, 1 gigabyte of storage seems more likely. I’m sure the military has tons of gigabit connections as well, but I’m not sure if it would necessarily be needed here. Considering they’re often in areas without high speed infrastructure, without a wired connection I assume it’s not that fast most of the time but I’m honestly not 100% sure there
HIRMARS yes I can see the mobility side of it but if you have a main camp like Sebastian or a FOB that you need to put firepower into that will be targeted or the position itself attacked then placing a HIRMARS there is not cost efficient if you lose a L118 it hurts but money wise not as much as a HIRMARS my head hurts just thinking about how Number one is going to exsplaine what happend and which bright spark sent it there for position that need to be held and will come under fire then a Gun is your best option . When I went to BAOR it was to a Abbot Regerment we were told our life exsptancey was between five to ten minutes after we open fired
💥 💣 Check out our partnership clothing brand! Attire For Effect💣 💥 www.attireforeffect.com 📸 Also follow them on Instagram: #attire_for_effect
I was actually working on Ft. Sill when these were being tested. In fact, I was working on patrol the day they were supposed doing the first live airborne test of a combat loaded HIMARS. Instead they decided to touchdown at the airfield on post after they had dropped all the airborne troops out the sides. I was blocking a main road near the DZ, got to watch one guy bounce! Think he had a broken leg was all but his chute definitely streamered.
Ukraine literally just punched out a moving 30 car Russian troop train (that was traveling many miles behind enemy lines) with a HIMARS missile.
@Matsimus You should consider getting onto Nebula so you can produce your videos without fear of RUclips's restrictions.
about time someone showed this. Theres a bunch of military statistics channels who claims that Canada doesn't have any self propeled rocket projectors. (rocket artillery vehicles) Such as VSB Defence for example.
He never said that the Canadian military *have* these systems. In fact some quick Google-fu reveals that they in fact no longer have any rocket artillery. Furthermore, Matt himself even did a video about the retirement of the Canadian self propelled Howitzers, literally all that’s left are the towed field guns.
So VBS Defense would be correct if they stated that the Canucks didn’t have an MLRS type platform.
Back in the 1980s when I was stationed at Grafenwöhr the MLRS and 155 tracked Artillery would emplace themselves along our Tac-site fence line. (I was in a HAWK unit) And when they fired they rocked our world quite literally. When the 155 fired you would actually miss a step while walking. Good times.
my dad served in a HAWK unit🙂
Good ole' HAWK
@@jonny-b4954 i served in a rb-70 unit
Yep. The power of artillery is awesome. I was an M-1 mechanic in Germany.
Although I was in the Army myself, I was a Cold War era Air Force brat stationed on Spangdhalem from 88-91 and we had a Hawk battery on base.
During the 1st Gulf War we watched a whole battalion of M270's fire all their rockets in a few minutes. They stretch towards the horizon. It was surreally beautiful.
I dont think its that much of an Drawback that HIRMAS has only half the Payload of the M270-MLRS, because of the quick reload.
Also, the most limiting Factor for Rocket-Artillery is probably Logistics.
The early MLRS took a couple minutes for it to go from the stowed position to slewed onto the target area, so mass volley fire to prevent counter battery was definitely a big thing. The HIMARS and updated MLRS both are capable of from stowed to target area & back to stowed seconds and as such I don’t think it’s as big of an issue. I believe it’s probably quicker to get back on the move after firing for a good shoot and scoot. Maybe leave the MLRS (in NATO/allies usage) for primarily the ATACMS instead of GMLRS.
@@soonerfrac4611 I have not served on an MLRS System, but just by the short Time it needs to reload and shoot off all its Rockets. There must be a lot of traffic going on to supply these Sytems, just imagine a hole Battery, how much tonnage and volume they can go through in just one Day.
Especially if u look at the size and weight of these Missle's.
a very sound remark from gOtze 1337 - in my view.
What is happening with HIMARS is that heavy artillery is back at the brigade level. The M110 205 mm is one clumsy beast. With a shell weight of 100 kg and 50-60 kg fpr the charge. Not only do you need a crew of 13 and a support vehicle PR. GUN. You allmost need engineering support to load the damned thing.
Rate of fire was 3 rounds pr TWO minutes in "burst". "Sustained" fire 1 round every two minutes.
With that rate of fire the enemy could get a squadron of Lancasters airborne.....
What did it achieve? A paltry 30-40 km range with its snub nosed 37 caliber tube. Let's say: Hardly worth the effort.
It is true that the rocket projectiles of the HIMARS are a LOT more expensive, but if they hit the objective it is well worth the price.
I would like the HIMARS put on a larger truck chassis so they can have suitable crew accomodation, as they are going to be on the road 24/7 - if for nothing else to reload from a local airfield.
I'm sure that HIMARS crews are also really glad they don't have to do track maintenance, either!
In terms of tonnage, artillery - be it rocket or grenade - is by far the most taxing item for any logistics train. I remember hearing that around 60-80% of the weight capacity is used for those units - but they are also responsible for around the same ratio of enemy casualties, so it's worth the effort.
There are combat scenarios with HIMARS that go way out of box for artillery. For example that a HIMARS will link with other assets and shoot against ships or that F-35s will be designating targets to the HIMARS to engage.
Wouldn't that call an AShM? Lockheed already planning an airlaunched version too
Yep, Link 16 👌
I remember a MLRS launch at a firepower demonstration at Ft Sill. Insanely loud, monstrous signature. But massive effects on target.
Home of the Field Artillery, I was there in 2002 for basic
Spent my entire career there as both an MP & DACP from 2k through 2013.
never heard the mlrs.. did it sound like "moaning minnie"?
@@niklas2378 It's like the space shuttle taking off. Just massive noise.
I heard the same thing from a guy's who's son manned such a system. He got to see a live fire demonstration. Said the same thing. Insanely loud and impressive as hell.
There is room for both rocket and gun/tube artillery on the peer v peer battlefield of today and tomorrow. Cost is still a limiting factor when it comes to fielding assets in peace time. That alone will ensure the continuation of 155mm guns in the armed forces.
There is a distinct possibility that the lines between self propelled artillery and main battle tanks could become blurred. If 130mm, 140,, or 150mm + tank tubes become the norm. It only requires an autoloading turret with high angles of elevation. For an MBT to fulfil the indirect fire role. It all depends which compromises military procurement choose to make.
Also, the 155mm is an operational level asset, yet HIMARS and GMLRS systems can also be used to bridge the operational-strategic gap.
Case in point, Ukraine annihilating enemy ammunition dump, bridges, EW systems, and rail freight carrying engineering vehicles. These are strikes which bridges the gap between operations and strategy.
Gus: Exactly, the two types of artillery complement each other. You can't really do sustained fire support from rocket artillery that it where tube artillery excels. In a high intensity conflict, one of the first critical missions for rocket artillery will be to take out the opponent's counter-battery assets (radar, sound-detection, etc.) to enable towed or SP tube artillery to then provide sustained fire support.
However, not every military is going to be fighting a high-intensity conflict; there are low to medium intensity conflicts where towed tube artillery is sufficient.
Doesn't the tubed arty use a rifled barrel whereas MBTs have all moved to smooth bore?
StarCraft siege tank confirmed?
@@mattwarner8273 Yes, it would be interesting to see which choice is made for a MBT expected to fulfil an artillery role. It's always going to be a compromise but things seem to be moving that way already. With both wheeled and tracked IFV's sporting MBT calibre weapons in tank like turrets.
We were working on a duel rocket cartridge for this system back around 2005 at Ray The On. We could fit two rockets into each; not the 6 or 1 options you've seen, It might be for home use only and not even sent to Iraq or Afghanistan. We've had a lot of trouble selling top of the line stuff to Japan and Israel (most publicized) and others that land up on Chinese runways, thus the F-22 wasn't exported. These two rockets out performed the single rocket in range and in a lot of other ways. I know it was purchased in quantity so it was approved after I left the program, as we were just working on the engineering sample(s) at the earlier date. I remember reading about it online, so it isn't a super secret anymore, but the spec's might be.
The Israeli's do have the m270 mlrs, maybe 70 of them, but they decided to expand the amount of rockets they could launch seeing a need for smaller and larger guided rockets. So they took the launcher mechanism off the m270 and put it on a truck that could mix up to 3 different types of rockets at a time.
You're thinking of the ATACMS ballistic missile
You’re thinking of the Precision Strike Missile, which is supposed to enter full service next year. 500+ kilometer range.
@@Shaun_Jones That's the one I bet, because I remember something about the range and being astonished. Again, I was more into manufacturing it and the end cost so what I knew was limited to parts and logistics to build the MF'er.
Romania bought 54 himars even before russia invaded ukraine.And they already received the first units.The contract got a loot of flack bc it was expensive and considered unnecesary but after how they perform in ukraine a lot of people(not russian trolls) changed their opinion.
And how do you know well in Ukr ?! CNN told you and , you obvious you believe all BS right ? Cuz ALL the evidence we saw until now, were some piss poor little holes of 25cm in a bridge pavement ... Do not let the murican pitch sale BS obscure your perspective, dude . Murica have all the interest to inflate the numbers and qualities, since many murican colonies will pay big bucks for it.( romenia included, :p )
Many people changed their mind after Russian invasion of Ukraine, especially the Germans, Finns and Swedes :)
@@tonyvu2011 - those "many peoples" are lazy ignorant who never bother to educate themselves in the situation of Donbass since 2014. Sadly, those ignorant have no clue about the drama and tragedy the peoples of Donbass suffer in last 8 years at the hands of ukronazi and Kiev regime. 14 000 killed in last 8 years, and several thousands more since 2022.
I think a lot of countries are looking carefully at this .In an artillery war it looks very effective
It is pretty cool for an older guy to hear about the advancement of weapons over time...
It is really Cool (and kinda funny) to see a young man like Mat (especially for the folks who have watched his channel since way before he was old enough to enlist), realizing that the current weapons will have the rookies of the very near future calling him an 'Old-Timer' about Artillery! And as funny as that sounds, when it happens, Mat is gonna feel pretty damn proud inside. He'll probably fuss and tell them to Knock that Sh*t Off... But he will be proud of being an 'Old Timer' that knows how Fire missions are calculated and executed (and Not by some damn Machines!)...
Nice video, Take Care Mat and Everyone, John
I feel like having worked in an era where computers have been employed to deadly results it would be a weird thing to turn around and denigrate them, like a pilot saying radar is bad because it's computerised
@@purplefood1 I completely agree with you about using the best technology available.
I also know that a Retired friend of mine was a Navigator on a B52 during the Cold War. He said that every mission they flew in training included a 'leg' of the flight plan that utilized 'celestial navigation' (using the stars through the observation port). Those 'Damn Machines' is an older guys Joke for the RELIANCE on just the technology and not teaching things like Celestial Navigation whether it's to a bomber Navigator or Sailors on Ships. Technology is a great thing, but it can 'Dumb people down' some. A perfect example is telephone numbers. You used to pickup the handset and you just automatically dialed the number of whoever you were thinking about calling. Now, most people, couldn't call anyone if their cellphone was broken or lost.
I think that the Technology is great. I just appreciate the teaching and learning of the skills that work when the technology doesn't. Think EMP here! Ya'll Take Care and be safe, John
@@JohnDoe-pv2iu I mean that's patently untrue, people had personal phonebooks and general phonebooks for looking up numbers if they weren't one of the handful they could recall off the top of their head, literally no one remembered every number for everyone they ended up calling. Also it's a terrible example because it's not like people can't remember things anymore there's just very little reason to try and remember every phone number when they're stored and retrieved so easily. Navigation by stars or calling in artillery is an actual learned skill that you need to teach and I do agree it's worthwhile teaching those skills but they are taught skills not knowing them doesn't make you dumber it makes you untrained. Acting like computers are dumbing people down is ignoring how people are actually working with computers, if you want to be safe in the case of an EMP (for some reason) then teach the older skills as well but let's not pretend they're even remotely as good as what we have these days.
SPH range is also increasing. XM1299 SPH that are to replace the M109s has already hit a target 72 km away using XM1113 RAP rounds in a demonstration. It may even hit further at 100km+ using XM1155 ramjet rocket rounds.
ERCA w/ excalibur will be 100km.+
@@stinopharan5528 They've also tried Excalibur but it can only go as far as 65km which is not bad as its not a RAP round. The closest SPH to have hit a similar range is South African G6-52 and German PzH 2000 at 67km using special RAP rounds.
Did 7 years in a HIMARS unit including one deployment to Afghanistan in support of a JSOC task force. We didn't shoot a lot. But when we did all of Bagram Airfield payed attention. Got to the point that whenever we were at the firing point, which you could see from the end of the flight line, a bunch of Airman would sit on their side of the fence for awhile to wait and see if we were going to shoot.
In 2016, when I was part of Operation Atlantic Resolve, we were part of an exercise in Poland (I was in the 10th BEB from Raider [1st Brigade, from the 3In Division based out of Fort Stewart in the US]) and I remember one day when we were setting up in the massive dome type tents near the training site, and we were bringing in the six pack liter bottles of water, and I was super tired and delirious. We had been awake for at least three days basically on our convoy from Graf in Germany to the training site in Poland. The officers were helping because it was all hands on deck and we needed to hurry up and get settled in so we could prepare for the training exercise. I started laughing, and the company commander CPT Berreth looks over at me and says " What's funny, Wirth?" We had a pretty close relationship as I was his gunner at the time and I had been his driver before. I said, "Sir it's not funny, I promise." And he insists that I say what's funny. So I held the six pack of liter bottles of water over my head and said, " Look Sir, I'm a HIMARS!" I then proceeded to pretend to fire rockets over my head with exceptional sound effects.
Needless to say, he and the other officers looked at me, shaking their heads in disbelief, and i was deeply embarassed.
10/10 would do it again
Bedankt
I think HIMARS used with M1299 Extended Range Cannon Artillery "ERCA" is the balance needed on the battlefield. ERCA rounds are cheaper to produce compared to HIMARS.
Yesterday i was looking a video of himars in your channel, but couldnt find one, and now. Boom ! ty man.
I found the short clip of a HIMARS truck chained to the deck of a USN warship interesting, and a proof-of-concept for extended-range ordinance that can be deployed in a contested area like the South China Sea. I would think the DoD is already looking into non-traditional platforms that can carry HIMARS to offset some of the established advantage the PLAN has created with its AAAD approach within the first island chain, reflecting the doctrinal shift back to supporting amphibious operations in hostile environments where air/naval supremacy by US assets may not be assured.
The US navy doesn’t even have to operate within the first island chain. There can be 6 or 7 super carriers along with a few light carriers launching air craft to destroy China’s navy airforce and the Chinese fleet. They would be supported by land based aircraft launching from Japan and Guam. The US has far more 5th generation jets than China and far more 4th generation jets as well. It wouldn’t be too difficult to destroy their airforce and air defense SAMs
Using rockets on ships is not new to the USN. Recall the rocket LSTs of WW2. Considered, if you will (sorry, my inner Rod Sterling coming out), a “sort of stealthy” littoral combat ship (either class) speeding within range, losing a guided salvo, getting the hell away.
Hard hit, hard to see coming, hard to see running away. Will it happen?
@@tylerclayton6081 You're presenting a very optimistic scenario that seems disturbingly out of touch with current force projection estimates regarding the strength and depth of the PLAN AAAD system already in place, and which is supported by a maritime combined arms force of relatively new, modern cruisers (even though the the Chinese refer to the Type 55 as a 'destroyer'), destroyers and submarines operating close to their home logistical bases.
The PLAN supports a fairly large "grey navy" of fishing boats which can probably be equipped in short order with box-type launchers to saturate the USN air defense capabilities of the 2-3 carrier strike groups that can be committed immediately, and the other 3-4 that may take as long as 3 weeks to arrive on station. You're also assuming that China doesn't incapacitate Guam, Diego Garcia and Yokosuka, which will be the bases supporting US and allied operations.
Long-range PGMs are essential elements in a response to potential Chinese aggression, and we need significant numbers that can be deployed on diversified platforms.
@@jordanulery524 I think you're on to something there! 😉
Just get a freight ship and strap a few HIMARS on it lol
As a spectator, it would seem that the HIMARS has a particular use case. Small precise, long range artillery, shoot and scoot. It seems complementary to a battery of howitzers who can lay down persistent fire across a wide area, albeit at a closer range.
It wish would seem that 2 HIMARS systems are far more versatile and resilient than one M270 MLRS.
I remember sat waiting at the start line for the 1st UK armoured division assault during OP Granby (Desert Storm)watching the MLRS and artillery bombardment, along with the Aerial bombardment Thinking to myself thank the lord I’m on this side. But for sustained long term artillery support the howitzers are hard to beat. For dash and bash runs these are the cats ass for sure. These and along with the fire and forget anti tank missile systems have been a game changer for the current war in Ukraine 🇺🇦.
I was just a few klicks away - 1st ID vet here. They sure were impressive to watch launching, especially at night.
I was a child watching on TV. It's one of the few things that I remember from the war. The other being a battleship firing. 😀
@@pratyushojha Pretty cool to see them in person I had my 21st birthday crossing into Iraq. Some party LOL !!!!!
I too was a kid, my dad was the XO of an American wild weasel squadron in Germany at the time. Our fighters were some of the very first non F-117’s into enemy territory. In fact, I believe they were not even allowed to engage enemy aircraft BVR until a specific time to ensure that they didn’t accidentally target a Nighthawk returning from Baghdad.
You're not a military RUclipsr _these days_ if you don't have a HIMARS video or two.
Or a nice thermobaric MLRS "grid square remover"
True still good content
That warrior intro is so cool dude, i mean you have to extended somehow or even make a mini dark movie about him.
I would like to add a note regarding why HIMARS is better than M270, mobility wise. To put it simply, it requires less ass. Lighter, more fuel efficient, highly mobile on and off road, helicopter slingable, C130 packable button punching badassery.
But seriously, ever seen tracks operate too independently of wheeled supply? Me neither.
Probably quieter as well
Now develop a version that can fire while still moving. With same precision.
@@alfaeco15 Doable - at least for approx. constant speed movement in straight line. After all they've already proven it on a ship. And yes, the ship was moving - that was the idea. Took couple of software upgrades. Question is rather whether such software wouldn't be too big, if you also have to have extensive map database etc. Given that apart from "1GB capacity" we don't know what is the capacity of HIMARS system. Computationally also harder, so just like with capacity upgrade might be required, but it isn't that much harder, given that a lot of the burden would still be on missile itself. Question is how often do they update their position and how long does it take to update it. If it is more than couple of seconds, then it might be too much for the missile to correct - perhaps slower barrage?
Thanks for this, I can see this as a very effective weapon. It can be carried on a C 130, can be deployed within minutes of landing, can fire and move within minutes, requires less skill to operate and would be ideally linked to drone surveillance of the target, which can be apparently hit with a very accurate missile. It can then drive 100km to the next location and be ready again. The only issue I can see is the cost of each missile.
One video said 200thousand for each missile. Way cheaper than a warehouse of arty munitions or a battery of howitzers about to explode
I bet they have sleds and parachutes for them too.
Amazon will sell these for $5 million includes 6 free rockets. If you are on Amazon Prime we will deliver this the same day by our own fleet of C-130 delivery planes
Look up in the dark net, ukranazis resell those for far cheaper.
@@redneckster6639 russian trolls :-)
I know you cannot cover the war Matt but just knowing the weapon systems present gives a very very good understanding into what is going on.
Why can't he cover the war? Because he's serving in the army?
@@JoeyC777 Yes because he is an active member of the armed forces and it is against rules. If he was not in the military he would probably have a gold mine covering the war (and would be my number one go to source of information), but he is a good man with principles first and that is worth a ton of respect in my view.
@@MichalProzac Thanks. Wasn't aware of that rule.
@@JoeyC777 Yeah Matt mentioned it a few times maybe he will notice and give you a better explanation than I ever could.
That's the difference between eastern warfare and western warfare, Easter relay on numbers and volume of fire power, like 30, 60 years ago, the west relay on precision, range, pin point accuracy and speed, HIMARS is good example, HIMARS doesn't need a 12+ missile launcher when it can use high precision missiles that can hit further than any eastern MLRS of similar characteristics
yeah the major difference is, that the west uses smaller more "elite" forces, expecting to get away with it, while former eastern block nations know, that once shit hits the fan, people start to die and equipment gets destroyed.
During the cold war, sovjet MBT were in most aspects similarly capable or surperior to western MBT with exception to the optronics, wich were slightly, but only slightly, worse.
The sovjets pitted about 7-10 MBT against each NATO MBT.
Guess who would have won WW3 in 1980.
It would not have been NATO.
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 in a conflict, ground forces don't mean shit when you don't have air superiority, like we see right now with Russia in Ukraine and NATO always stand out for that doctrine, it's doesn't matter how many tanks or SPG you can have if the enemy knows where ar you ging and what are you gonna do your numbers worth little more.
@@ME262MKI well, what's the other thing, Russia today is really big in besides artillery?
And the sovjet union back then too.
Multi layered air defense.
Sovjet union has back in the day, just like Russia today, one if not the strongest air defense capability of the world.
You can't really use your air power VS that
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 how can you shoot what you cannot see? the US has the best electronic warfare craft in the world, and the ability to hit air defense before it can even react. HARM's, JSOW's, and a plethora of other items meant to deal specifically with this supposedly superior air defense.
@@shimakazef.7809 dude for every air defense system nato brings to the field, russia brings 50.
and those are not shitty 50´s systems but pretty modern systems too.
During the cold war, NATO would have faced a no fly zone over central europe, so air surperiority would have been gone.
stealth aircraft like F-22 are a thing of the 90´s.
Until then you would have faced russian air defense with standart non stealth jets.
Even today, Russias air defense capabilities are more or less the strongest of the world and they can deny air acess to the eastern baltic sea and parts of europe, even to the US.
Every anti air emplacement operation (wild weasel) would suffer massive casualties.
guess how long the US or NATO can keep wild weasel missions running, when they loose 1/3 of aircraft each mission?
Thats why the great emphasis on artillery was made during the cold war by both sides.
You cant expect to have air surperiority or even limited air support and your ground forces will face an equal or surperior enemy on the ground.
the solution: massed artillery. tube and rocket.
btw do you really think, that russia and china do not have EWAR systems and do not have them en masse?
How will you engage enemy radar positions, if you get permanently jammed and engaged with very long range AA missiles that are capable of engaging Targets 400km away?
Awesome weapon. It perfectly exploits Russia's weakness it seems.
I guess you never heard of the tornado-s
HIMARS?? Are you referring to the "Orc slayer 5000"??
Would there be any advantages to an extended range loitering munition out of a HIMARS system?
One wonders what MLRS effectiveness would be like if the US retained the submunition versions of the rockets.
They were retired because they had an unacceptable dud rate, and there isn’t really a fix to guarantee that the tens of thousands of submunitions have perfect reliability.
Was waiting for this one 👍
Beautiful piece of kit
Historically artillery is still the biggest killer of infantry on the battlefield
HIMARS is now, I wonder what is waiting around the corner for the next generation of long-range rocket artillery. While watching this video I was thinking if HIMARS doctrine is attacking the enemy beyond the forward edge of the front line, or does it really have the capability to be used in close support of troops in contact.
ukraine could use a longer range precision missle now, to take out that bridge that connects crimea and russia. the russians are sending a lot of munitions across that bridge, and if taken out it would HELP UKRAINE IMMENSELY, maybe even getting russia to leave even sooner!
I once found a picture of MLRS inside the Turbo bubble gum. They usually put photos of super cool cars like Lambo or Vector but that one time, it was MLRS and it looked like the future was already here.
Poland wants 500 HIMARS launchers.
The Arsenal of democracy is at your service.
I doubt the whole USA has 500 systems
@@greeker10 Just over a hundred were built for export.
@@greeker10 Poland wants to buy 500 NEW HIMARS launchers.
@@rightiswrongrightiswrong806 nope, us have more then 400 in service
Shoot 'n Scoot. Shock 'n Awe. Speed, surprise, violence of action.
Can counter-battery radars detect the ionised exhaust plumes of the rockets, or just the missile frames?
Radars probably just frame, but there are orher systems with detect launch of misiles. For sure such are in satelites and new fighers
@@zeberek1987 Weather radar picks up clouds, so yeah, counter battery radar with high resolution will be able to pick up the exhaust plume
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 this is very weak comparisions clouds are big, many kilometers wide. There are better ways to find rocket
If it has a range of over 50km or 70km it may have burned out before it gets above the radar horizon. If it is GPS guided it can fly a non ballistic shaped path to confound back tracking radar. In any case the HIMARS could relocate before the missiles even hit the ground and counter battery fire has commenced.
@@williamzk9083 dude, counter battery radar is ground scanning radar.
there is next to no radar horizon today.
ground surveilance radar is used to pick up ground targets for artillery, air strikes, long range missile strikes etc
The forward operating base and field guns being setup is fine... as long as you're fighting insurgents or lower tier forces.
But against a near peer adversary yes, emplaced field guns are in need of going the way of the dodo.
I really like the new Hawkeye system for the 105, and a slightly larger version for the 155.
But not every military is fighting a high intensity conflict. Even then, it is really difficult to provide sustained fire support using rocket artillery; as others have said once you fire your pod, you have to move, drop off your old pod/reload a new one and relocate to the next firing position; there is a break in firing. There will be a mix of rocket and tube artillery, and some of that tube artillery will be towed and some will be SP's; they complement each other.
@@Bob_Betker I dont have any issue with tube artillery, but towed artillery I think may be nearing the end of its service life when it comes to any sort of high intensity near peer conflict. Its just not survivable enough when fighting an enemy that has persistent surveillance and counter battery radars.
Like Sooner said, the Hawkeye 105mm sp system looks good, and I dont know the price but if it can be had for ~near~ the same price as a regular M119 then thats def the way to go.
Same for the 155mm/M777, skip the expensive/finicky autoloader system, mount the gun on some sort of heavy duty wheeled platform with a recoil reducing system like the Hawkeye and install an auto laying system so you can get in complete your fire mission and get out quick. Sort of like the CAESAR. Keep the price down so you can acquire enough to outfit nearly the entire force.
CAESAR looks good, but Ive heard they're nearly as expensive as full tracked self propelled gun. Same for Archer...
@@mmeade9402 Well at least with the archer crew doesnt have to poke out , and it can be operated with only 1 crew if need be. Reload is done by another vehicle & crew so it would be sustainable. All these nice features drives up the cost , but I rather have mobile arty then anything that drones can drop DIY hand grenades on and take out the entire crew.
HIMARS is a fantastic system, we need it in the UK
@Matsimus, do you have videos on different Artillery Amunitions?
I was on Kandahar air field in 2010 when they fired these off. It was intense. None of us normal folk knew what was really going on. Just hearing those rockets screaming by.
Great Information as always!
My son is currently stationed at Fort Sill as Marine. He will start Field Artillery MOS on Jan 5th 2025.
HIMARS to Matsimus: "The future is now old man".
Did you serve with the Danes in Musa Qala?
What is the ring antenna on both vehicles?🤔
How does counterbattery fire locate rocket artillery?
I'd imagine that modern guided rocket artillery missiles could be programmed to make a few early 'random' course corrections before following a ballistic arc so that any enemy radar further downrange which attempts to back trace that ballistic arc will wind up targeting some empty ground 1/2 mile (or whatever) away from the actual firing point.
But the missiles have to do the random course correction before they are picked up on radar then, and aggressive course correction at the beginning steals range like nothing else. So the GMLRS rockets are said to do the regular ballistic arc in the beginning, and then flatten out the curve on the way down, thus extending their range, and probably making counter battery calculations a little harder too.
@@benghazi4216 Fair point.
I guess the targeting/firing solution computers could automatically scale an early course correction based on target range so that on closer targets could throw off any counter battery attacks to a decent degree, whereas a target at the limit of your range you wouldn't be able to waste any rocket fuel to try and obfuscate your firing position using this method.
The M31 doesn't really have a normal ballistic curve it either strikes in a 90 degree angle from 10km height or in an angle to the target. And because of that it can't be seen by counter radar
The old way was directional microphones hooked up to oscilloscopes. The time difference of arrival of the gun fire sounds could be used to calculated the position of the artillery. You could possibly also pick up the shockwaves of the shells I imagine. Modern systems would be computerized.
Next thing you know, soldiers will be playing REDCON irl lol
And speaking of the future, regarding the guided systems and what not, it also reminds me of another game, Warzone 2100, it had an extensive focus on Radar/Fire support/Counter-battery.
It worked pretty simply afaik, just link said fire support to a radar (stationary or mobile) and keep them in range and you got artillery dominating the battlefield that easy! Though from what I could remember of my limited time playing it was a real pain trying to get Radar/Artillery up if your enemy already has established Sensors n Howitzers.
Why does the HIMARS have to wait a few seconds before firing each rocket/missile?
Great video
For long range, precision strikes, HIMARS arguably has no equivalent. However, it is relatively high cost when compared to conventional artillery i.e.
One HIMARS missile= 150,000 usd, one 155 mm shell=400 usd.
I think a conventional artillery shell must be more like $4000/round. GPS guided munitions fired from a top end long range Self Propelled Howitzer such as the PzH 2000 must be equally powerful. A PzH 2000 can time and adjust firing angles. to enure that 6 155mm shells hit at the same time.
@@williamzk9083 I stand corrected, still a considerable difference, not as readily available as conventional artillery shells and therefore used for different purposes i.e long range, high-value targets
And there's still a place for the original cluster warhead. Because of its long range and precision, a few HIMARS were able to cover territory in Afghanistan that would have required numerous tube arty fire bases.
except it wasn't a conventional war so it could not be won by an army.
the problem was political
@@Marvin-dg8vj True, but the troops appreciated the fire support.
Cluser ammunition has mostly been baned by the Oslo treaty.
@@williamzk9083 But it would still be seriously useful.
hey Matsimus been following your channel for a bunch of years l, I'm trying to get into the CAF and wondering if you could do a video on CAF drill instruction, thanks!!
What the hell is that thing at around 6 minutes 10 seconds that flies across just after the himars launch lol
1:00 nö I don't. Why is this? Because in the same Video you're doing this 3:23 and taking about your deployment
I wonder if they would ever try to make a HIMARS out of a Amk27 or 28 MTVR?
Matsimus at 0259 :time to sleep
HIMARS at 0300 : LISTEN TO THE SONG OF MY PEOPLE
Matsimus: 0_0
What kind of gun are you on?
Nice video you should give us a video about the AScalon future main battle tank gun .
HIMARS first of all is effective due to its extremely accurate GPS guided rockets. That gives a single rocket an effect comparable to several salvoes from an entire traditional artillery bataljon - if not much more when it comes to actually destroying the target and not just keeping it down - at at 2-3 times the range of traditional artillery! That also gives a huge logistic advantage as you can achieve a given amount of firepower with just a fraction of the supplies and manpower. A single very mobile launcher vehicle is also much less vulnerable than big traditional artillery units. In that context even the 16 vehicles in Ukranian service so far represent a tremendous firepower and if they achieve the 50 systems whished for (should be possible) the Russian army will be in big trouble. Anything they deploy west of the Dniepr river risk being cut off and crushed.
Hell yes. Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦
rossia vperde!
Slave Ukraine you mean.
As awsome as the MLRS is especially where it is in such need today,🇺🇦, the good old boom sticks will still be king of the battle field, probably see even longer range artillery in the future, it augments the howitzers great, but grunt is always going to need to be able to call in fire at moment notice for economical price with devastating effects. My 2 cents...cheers👍
Yawn Ukraine sucks
also tom many computers can be a problem if they have a virus or emp is used then they are in the dark i wonder if it has manual launch function or if it is all computerised.
EMP would not be tactically used since it also fries the enemies stuff
The comment about crew morale is interesting, if a platform is more enjoyable to use & creates a good team atmosphere that is a subtle value to consider from the top desks... but, survivability & effectiveness are even better for overall morale & ultimate objectives...
Is there a rocketmodule planned for the Boxer?
What is the cost of a salvo of 6 rockets? Be it unguided and/or GPS guided
About a million.
150k$ gps guided rocket, so a salvo of 6 costs 1mil$. However, the high cost is due to very low production volume of the rockets and the design is pretty "new", electronics components inside it is very expensive with such a low volume. I have read somewhere that even US stockpile only has bought total appx 50000 rounds since 2010s, and US has only used 1/3 of that number in about 15 years. Now with the thing in Ukraine, suddenly "real war" is possible everywhere, nations start buying both the HIMARS/MLRS and the guided rocket ammunition, cost should reduce quickly with such high demand.
I've been inspecting them for shipment to Ukraine from a military base in the PNW.
al-Zawahiri confirms America has very accurate PRECISION munitions
A bit of Talisman Sabre 21 footage there.
Can/does the crew stay in the cab when it fires?
You should do a Video on the Tornado S
I swear iu want one just to say i have one. roll up at the club, at the BBQ, to a house party. No one would mess with me cause you know i can bring the smoke.
Australia will be getting these for artillery as well as anti ship roles.
Is it a good daily commuter?
Lmao nah but it has a mean 24 disc changer in the back!
Video suggestion: with the success of HIMARS regarding precision, meaning less of a burden on logistics, how will it evolve? Is it for every country? It's expensive which will discourage some armies. Is it modular so that the launcher and cockpit could be put on another brand without that much extra cost? Germany might prefer Mercedes,m Sweden Volvo, Italy Iveco etc.
It's extremely expensive and very slow to reload, requiring more support vehicles than the new wheeled NLOS artillery systems that several countries develop.
Russias 2C351, FLOX and malva artillery are already being fielded in Ukraine - several dozen, compared to the 4 himars they have left
@@pteppig 4 HIMARS? Ukraine has 16 of them now with a recent addition of 4 more. There is no evidence that a single HIMARS system has been destroyed.
@@pteppig malva is mortal systemi dont know if they even start production. Floks is for sure not even produced yet they want start production on late of 2022
@@pteppig It takes less than 10 minutes to reload the HIMARS system. And each GMLRS comes in at around $160k, not a bad cost when you consider each one of these missiles can be guided in on independent targets with extreme precision.
@@pteppig So Flox is a mortar and Malva just a wheeled Pion? They're nowhere near the capability of HIMARS. Also HIMARS are the launcher vehicle and then a reload transporter. You know, like every fucking artillery system ever.
So the complaints from the artillery guys with HIMARS are similar to the complaints from the Fighter Jocks with respect to un-maned platforms?
Canada needs some of these
Why!?
@@dominicdaley5702 because it has proven itself as a effective standoff weapon
What you think about Serbian MORAVA MLRS?
Great!
Wow.....with the NVG you can see that sometimes the rocket ignites slowly and then goes off. Sometimes it's a slow burn. I bet they don't really want that.
No, you are seeing the left over stuff burning from the launch of the missile. That isn't a slow burning fuel and then fully igniting.
I would not be terribly surprised if the next generation of upgrades for artillery will include drones. It should be quite possible for individual firing vehicles, or towed guns, to have their own drones so that if need be they can do their own forward observing for quicker response instead of depending on information coming down the chain of command.
Not really necessary, there is so much data coming from drones, sensors and other sources that you need a centralized capacity to filter and prioritize everything.
I was hoping to see some clips of the rockets landing...
Go watch some Ukraine footage. It’s there. Most people don’t like seeing people blow up. And footage of it landing in training is rare.
The US has announced a new tranche of weapons for Ukraine’s forces, including ammunition for increasingly important rocket launchers and artillery guns.
The new $550m package will “include more ammunition for the high mobility advanced rocket systems
@@Biden_is_demented The Germans have recently sent x3 but like all proxy wars the true numbers of weapons flowing into ones country are never known , most of the announcements are phycological in nature , as for game changers , one needs to look at its capability as an individual surgical strike weapon, or operating in a battery, highly manoeuvrable and extremely hard to counter fire against , the Russians do not posses anything as good, more so its mix of rocket ammunition , the aim now for the UDF is to hit the rear echelon area of Russian forces, disrupting their logistical bases and command and control , all in reach of the highly accurate HMARS .As for your presence part, one needs to understand that this proxy war is different , it is highly advanced and Ukraine has a blank cheque book guaranteed by the west and others , Putin got away with Crimea, he will not be allowed to get away with this unprovoked and unwarranted attack on another sovereign country and for sure will pay a heavy price for it , and as most credible countries have stated, must never be allowed to continue with his bad acting in the region ever again ! which means folks are done with him !
How much to buy two in Ukraine?
They will be effective as long as there is no proper mechanism to intercept the missles. With its high demand for it now, you can be sure that militaries around the world will be spinning to find ways to counter these systems effectively. If it can be done, regular artillery will reign once again, since you cannot really intercept the projectiles from that.
yes you can
IS that a drone at 7:24?
HIMARS & MLRS= Катюша!
How accurate are the unguided rockets?
Bro, I love your channel but change the intro music back to the original. It's not that the new one is bad, but the old one from a few years ago was cool.
also called the 60 km sniper
Long range ballistics!
i love rocket aletilery and HIMARS is best one
Imagine if they had one of these next to a bunch of regular artillery and someone had the bright idea of seeing if the rockets work in the regular artillery? Also watching this video with subtitles had the name come out as 'high Mars'
With all the new orders in it might turn into the f-16 of rocket arty...mass production and long build time..maybe cheap in the long run
Another big thing they have against counter fire is they can take a flight path to specifically evade counter tracking, rockets go out then up. This has been observed in Ukraine
I wonder if there is a randomisation to that dogleg to prevent counter battery from being programmed to account for it in the future.
Just a friendly neighborhood reminder himars is the launcher not the truck
Now the correct moment to intensify the fight against Putin. Ukraine NEEDS AIR SUPPORT. Слава Україні💙💙💛💛
Allows for a gigabyte of data 😂 Was built in the early 2000s alright. Considering firing solutions take up basically no storage though, I’m sure it doesn’t make any practical difference. Really an amazing feat of engineering all around
Has a gigabyte of storage? Or has gigabyte transfer speeds?
@@Jarandjar considering the time frame when they were designed, 1 gigabyte of storage seems more likely. I’m sure the military has tons of gigabit connections as well, but I’m not sure if it would necessarily be needed here. Considering they’re often in areas without high speed infrastructure, without a wired connection I assume it’s not that fast most of the time but I’m honestly not 100% sure there
@@topshelfmusicgroup5899 Pretty sure the Air Force has their own network, I don't think any military ever uses civilian infrastructure.
HIRMARS yes I can see the mobility side of it but if you have a main camp like Sebastian or a FOB that you need to put firepower into that will be targeted or the position itself attacked then placing a HIRMARS there is not cost efficient if you lose a L118 it hurts but money wise not as much as a HIRMARS my head hurts just thinking about how Number one is going to exsplaine what happend and which bright spark sent it there for position that need to be held and will come under fire then a Gun is your best option . When I went to BAOR it was to a Abbot Regerment we were told our life exsptancey was between five to ten minutes after we open fired