Bang! You're Dead.

MLRS / Lockheed

I recall watching some of the earliest firings of the Army’s Multiple-Launch Rocket System on a test range at Oklahoma’s Fort Sill nearly 30 years ago. The tracked vehicles “ripple fired” multiple rounds 20 miles downrange. It made a lot of noise and came pretty close to its targets, which generally were intended to be tanks and other armor spread out across a battlefield. It was the dirt equivalent of carpeting bombing.

But just as the Air Force was able to make dumb bombs smart by linking GPS guidance systems to moveable tail fins, the MLRS has gone to school as well. Firing a barrage of rockets at a Taliban stronghold in Afghanistan might kill the bad guys, but it would kill far more civilians. So MLRS rockets now sport GPS guidance, just like their airborne siblings.

MLRS smart rocket / Lockheed

Each rocket hits within three feet of its aim point. “One round, one kill capability,” is how manufacturer Lockheed Martin puts it. “The 70-kilometer sniper” is what soldiers say. More than 1,500 of the rounds have been fired in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Yesterday’s New York Times reported the success the smart rockets are having in Afghanistan:

…residents say that the Taliban have been stunned by fast-paced raids on their leaders and bases. In particular they talk with awe of a powerful new rocket that has been fired from the Kandahar air base into Panjwai and other areas for the last two or three weeks, hitting Taliban compounds with remarkable accuracy.

Of course, as Slate notes this morning, pinpointing those Taliban compounds remains the critical link in the kill chain.

Related Topics: mlrs, weapons, National Security
  • Latest on Battleland

    Army photo / Sgt. Michael J. MacLeod

    Humpin’ It…And Jammin’ It…

    Reuters

    China’s ‘Security Dilemma’ Risks Arms Race in Asia

    TOKYO – A shooting war with China may not be inevitable, but a dangerous arms escalation seems a dead certainty. That’s the take from a rare public discussion here this week among naval experts from Japan, the U.S. and China.

    Chris Hondros / Getty Images

    Mental Ills Top Reason U.S. Troops Now Hospitalized

    Four of the top five non-combat medical conditions sending troops to the hospital in 2011 were mental ailments, the Pentagon reports:

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Indeed. Proper targeting requires reliable HUMINT and reliable HUMINT requires NOT taking out civilians.
    .
    Just another example of why the anti-Muslim animus in this country is not only ignorant but significantly harmful to national security. Don’t the fine folks in Murfreesboro realize that we rely on our Muslim allies to root out the bad guys?
    .
    sigh……..

  • michaelfury

    “we rely on our Muslim allies to root out the bad guys”

    Yes, somebody has to drop the DIME.

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/dropping-a-dime/

  • pintortwo

    Thank you for this post Mr. Thompson. I have two questions/comments that I hope you will consider:
    .
    1) This system is designed to hit “Taliban compounds with remarkable accuracy”; but the Drone missile system has shown this same capacity at a fraction of the cost (the M270 MLRS program represents a roughly $2 billion dollar contract with Lockheed Martin -link). It seems to be an expensive, redundant program.
    .
    2) The Slate article says “the ultimate goal of the military campaign (is) degrading the Taliban to the point at which their leaders are compelled to stop fighting and hold talks on reconciliation with Afghanistan’s constitutional government”. However, the Taliban has consistently tried to negotiate peaceful reconciliation with the Karzai government. In fact, it seems we are the impediment to such talks. For instance:
    .
    “(L)ong-simmering conflict between Karzai and key officials of the Barack Obama administration over (negotiations with Taliban leadership) came to a head… when the Afghan president refused to heed US signals to back off his proposal to invite the Taliban leaders to participate in a nationwide peace conference.
    (…)
    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded by pressing Karzai to demand far-reaching concessions from the Taliban in advance of the meeting… conditions that would make it impossible for leaders of the insurgency to agree to if they are interpreted literally.” (link to follow)
    .
    As such, can we assume that the ultimate goal here is defending US compounds (as part of a broad network of bases) against attack from indigenous people that resist our presence?
    .
    Talk of accuracy and forcing the Taliban to negotiate are, to me, smoke-screen for these ulterior motives. Please tell me if you disagree.

  • pintortwo
  • killerdrgn

    The MLRS and Hellfire Missiles (Drones) have different purposes, The Hellfire is for much more precise assassination targeting, whereas the MLRS system (Rockets+mobile launcher) can hit multiple targets over a wide area, without much of a reload time, and is used to take out larger targets or a wider area of personnel. I.E. MLRS can take out an advancing army whereas the Hellfire will only be able to take out the general.

  • afguy

    Rocket impact = extremely accurate.
    .
    Explosion blast radius = not so much so. Good for the target as well as other civilians (hostile or not) standing near the primary target.
    .
    We’ve still got the same problem as with the drone strikes. Targeting only as good as the information you’re given. Collateral damage similarly so.

  • pintortwo

    Thanks killerdrgn.
    .
    Seeing as the Taliban don’t have an army (advancing or otherwise) nor larger or multiple targets (no tanks, ships, missile sights, infantry, etc) and we appear to be exclusively conducting “precise assasination targeting”, the MLRS has little application here. In fact, I’m curious what enemy the Air Force has in mind when they write checks to Lockheed.
    .
    IMO, this is yet another example of Billion$ going to defense contractors to buy cold-war relics.
    .
    The Times article seems little more than Pentagon-press-release to justify their budget and distract us from discussing the Military’s mission in an informed way.

  • afguy

    …whereas the Hellfire will only be able to take out the general.
    .
    And anyone in the building with him or the wedding party he’s attending.
    .
    And if the general isn’t actually at the party as claimed (but, instead, the enemy of the informant, who has really nothing to do with the “bad guys”), you STILL take out your “target” and anyone else in the vicinity.
    .
    You’r still at the mercy of the quality of the intelligence.

  • liberalmeltdown

    Maybe the intelligence should get intelligent and give up the bad guys while the intelligent are far, far away.

  • herby002

    Huh?

  • liberalmeltdown

    I am typing this s l o w for you.
    .
    Intelligence comes from the civilians or insiders that know where the bad guys are. Since they might not want to be blown to little bits by the missile strikes, it should behoove them to turn in the bad guys and evacuate the area.

  • herby002

    Thank you for the explanation.

    Are you saying that we have intelligence people on the ground who have infiltrated the enemies’ ranks, then transmitted the specific locations of the enemies’ leaders to US military command centers – then extricated themselves from the locale which is to be targeted by a missile, and watched as the targets are blown up?

    Or what?

  • liberalmeltdown

    “…residents say that the Taliban have been stunned by fast-paced raids on their leaders and bases. In particular they talk with awe of a powerful new rocket that has been fired from the Kandahar air base into Panjwai and other areas for the last two or three weeks, hitting Taliban compounds with remarkable accuracy.”
    .
    This statement is from locals, who can provide intelligence. Intelligence in this context means information. Such as, the Taliban are over there. Now, since locals know that the Taliban are talking about the powerful new rocket, it might be an opportunity for them to rid themselves and us of the Taliban by providing intelligence, or information, on the location of the Taliban (who are the bad guys) and then not hanging around to be blown up along with the Taliban. Intelligent, no?

blog comments powered by Disqus