From Katyusha to Tornado: prospects for multiple launch rocket systems


How many times during the parades did we hear anyone comment on the sense of humor of the designers of artillery systems? “Well, the flower bed has gone. A bunch of flowers that bring death. "


Indeed, the names of our receiver systems make many people smile. Especially for those who know these systems firsthand, and thoroughly. The “Flower,” which destroys a platoon’s stronghold with one shot, really inspires respect.

But there are systems in our artillery that have never been “flowers.” The first bore the beautiful female name Katyusha, and later, modern systems no longer hide their essence. “Grad”, “Hurricane”, “Tornado”, “Tornado”. This is no longer a flower bed, it is a natural disaster. With all the ensuing consequences.

Why MLRS did not reach the maximum of opportunities


Today, the ground forces are armed with several multiple launch rocket systems. The most famous is the Grad system. This complex is a direct descendant of the famous Katyusha. More precisely, the BM-21 is nothing more than a deep modernization of the BM-13. Dear veteran, adopted in the distant 1963, is still in service with almost 40 countries of the world. Moreover, Grad is copied by many countries of the world, or modified by these countries.

Modernization most often concerned the chassis, ammunition and equipment. But overall, the system remained unchanged. Too good, unpretentious and combat-ready machine is the BM-21. And the firing range of this 122-mm rocket is decent - up to 30 km, depending on the type of ammunition. Usually, fire is fired at ranges of 5-20 km.

It should be recognized that the BM-21 inherited from the BM-13 not only positive, but also negative qualities. First of all, it is a low accuracy of shooting. The system is applied not by purpose, but by area. And the second - the firing range for a modern war is clearly not enough.

In the late 90s, a system appeared that allowed you to shoot not only further, up to 40 km, but also more accurately. The new car installed a new guidance system with satellite navigation. I'm talking about the new Tornado-G car. By the way, two types of ammunition began to be used there. Ammunition began to be divided into cluster and high-explosive fragmentation.

This partially solved the problem of accuracy and range. But the machine did not reach the necessary parameters requested by the Ministry of Defense.

The same thing happened with more powerful systems. MLRS "Hurricane", adopted in the late 70's, and MLRS "Smerch" could fire at a greater range, carry a larger explosive charge at the expense of a larger caliber, but ... The problem of accuracy was not solved.

Although for the "Tornado" all the same, homing shells were created. It is these shells that fly 120 km today and hit the target. In principle, with a projectile mass of 800 kg, with a warhead divisible by 72 elements, and a firing accuracy record for the MLRS, the probable deviation from the target of 150 meters does not look critical.

So, as can be seen from the above examples, the designers squeezed the maximum possible out of the systems themselves. Increased range, increased charge, increased accuracy, increased area of ​​damage. Moreover, for the most advanced systems of the Tornado-S type, even ammunition has been created with the GLONASS system in the initial and final sections of the flight. For Tornado-S, the deviation from the target generally does not exceed several meters.

Yes, today Russia is a leader in the design and manufacture of multiple launch rocket systems. But leadership is ghostly. For example, sea-based MLRS, due to certain circumstances, today completely do not satisfy sailors. We need systems that would hit not areas, but targets. And there are many such examples.

What designers are working on


Back in 2018, in an interview with Red Star, the head of missile forces and artillery of the RF Armed Forces, Lieutenant General Mikhail Matveevsky, clearly defined ways to improve artillery and MLRS, including. Just for most people not related to weapons issues, this information passed by.

“The experience of local wars and armed conflicts of recent years has shown that fighting is impossible without the effective use of artillery reconnaissance, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles. The Zoopark-1M and Aistenok artillery reconnaissance assets that came into service with the missile forces and artillery proved to be positive during practical testing. "

Perhaps, one cannot say more succinctly about the tasks for designers in the open press. Possibly, in closed meetings the tasks were set more specifically, but the general task is clearly visible from this quotation. The Russian Ministry of Defense has identified ways to modernize the MLRS including.

Modernization should occur due to the introduction of modern equipment into the system, the active use of artillery reconnaissance equipment, including not only radar stations, but also drones of all kinds, and the creation of new guided ammunition.

By the way, today you can already talk about one invention of Russian designers.

Launching a drone at a great range (namely, the same “Tornadoes” or “Tornado-S” fire today at a long range) means delaying the time for the main salvo. And the appearance of the drone over the enemy’s positions will give him the opportunity to carry out measures to minimize losses.

Designers from NPO "Splav" solved this problem simply. The drone was installed in the shell for the "Tornado." Thus, the drone appears over enemy positions at the beginning of the shelling and works precisely at the final stage of the flight, directing shells at specific targets. The product proved to be excellent in trials ...

If we summarize everything that is happening today in the design bureaus for the creation of elements of MLRS, you can see the trend of further development of multiple launch rocket systems. In a compressed form, it will look like this: MLRS of the future should become high-precision and long-range weapons!

The firing range of such weapons should be increased to 200 or more kilometers, and the time for deployment, aiming and firing a shot is reduced to a minimum. Ideally up to seconds.

As a result of this, the systems must be equipped with an automatic guidance system, which, by the way, is already used in Tornado-S. This is "Success-R."

We, I mean Russia, are a continental power. And our army is designed to conduct continental wars. This situation is due both geographically and historically. We traditionally fight on land. So, the need for MLRS systems for a long time will be relevant for us.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

24 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. vvvjak 18 March 2020 11: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The firing range of such weapons should be increased to 200

    Belarusian MLRS "Polonaise" (RB chassis, missiles - China) has already reached these indicators, well, at least that is what official sources say.
    1. kind 18 March 2020 12: 36 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      We have any division of the Strategic Missile Forces, also a kind of MLRS, with a range of up to 15000 km laughing
      1. Kalmar 18 March 2020 13: 41 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Good
        We have any division of the Strategic Missile Forces, also a kind of MLRS

        To drive Syrian barmaleys and the like with the help of the Strategic Rocket Forces is somehow uncivilized or something.
        1. V.I.P. 18 March 2020 16: 39 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          China makes MLRS with a firing range of 400 km - this is WS2D, WS 2C range of 300 km uses anti-radar missiles, WS 3 - range of 200 km missile with inertial guidance system or GPS, WS1B range of 180 km, A 100 (copy Smerch) range of 100 km, AR1A1 range of 130 km, WN80 range of 80 km. And this is not all models. there are analogues of hail and there are models only for export ... .... Belarusians had something to choose from according to the firing range ...
  2. novel66 18 March 2020 11: 17 New
    • 8
    • 1
    +7
    if the system is volley, then accuracy is not important, and if the system is high-precision, then volleying is no longer needed
    ps you yourself are the captain of evidence!
    1. vvvjak 18 March 2020 11: 22 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      "If you drank well, then it means bad in the morning, if in the morning it’s good, then you drank badly." laughing
      1. novel66 18 March 2020 11: 35 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        meticulously noticed! lol
    2. Kalmar 18 March 2020 13: 05 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: novel xnumx
      if the system is volley, then accuracy is not important

      But why? If the task is not to “burn out these N hectares of the earth’s surface”, but to “unwind everything significant on these N hectares”, then accuracy nevertheless plays a role. Especially if the targets are small and protected (say, armored vehicles).
      1. novel66 18 March 2020 13: 07 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        how to manage each! missile in a salvo? IMHO impossible, meaning - the system is not volley
        1. Kalmar 18 March 2020 13: 40 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: novel xnumx
          how to manage each! missile in a salvo?

          Each rocket simply tries to get itself not just into the square on the map, but into something more specific in its field of vision. One of the options is SPBE, as is the case with the 9M55K1 shell. Others are possible.
        2. vvvjak 18 March 2020 13: 46 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: novel xnumx
          how to manage each! missile in a salvo?

          You can manage, but why is it necessary. Look, “Arly Burke” can also shoot “Axes” in one gulp. And when an MLRS volley burst occurs, superposition of blast waves (interference) occurs, as a result of which the wave amplifies, with the correction of missiles this effect can be safely discarded.
          1. 5-9
            5-9 18 March 2020 15: 58 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            What? Axes ... volleys ??? Well, if the launch of 30 Axes for 40-50 is considered to be a volley, then yes, because before, they only managed to get a few pieces a day ...
            1. vvvjak 18 March 2020 16: 20 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: 5-9
              What? Axes ... volleys ???

              "Launcher equipment allows you to simultaneously prepare for launch 16 missiles of various types and launch them at a rate of one rocket per second."(C) https://topwar.ru/12154-esmincy-arli-berk-rekordsmeny-s-raketnym-vooruzheniem.html
              Py Sy. Volley MLRS "Grad" 40 shots in 20 s.
              1. 5-9
                5-9 19 March 2020 07: 15 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                The hardware of the Mk.41 launcher is quite possible ... in 2 seconds it will release 2 Standards ... it is absolutely not a fact that in 4 seconds it will be able to release 4 Standards, but in 6 - 6 ....

                With Axes, the ambush is different. In the first versions, the flight mission was loaded into the rocket itself for a day and the highest rate of fire from one carrier was several rockets per day. In extreme TLAM-E it is reduced to minutes or tens of minutes. The real rate of fire by these very TLAM-Es (of which only 600-800 have been made and 150 of them have already been produced in Syria) by Burki is 30 pieces in 40-50 minutes ... The main plus of UKKS and Caliber is that 8 pieces out of RTOs go out in half a minute .
        3. Lopatov 18 March 2020 18: 10 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: novel xnumx
          how to manage each! missile in a salvo? IMHO impossible, meaning - the system is not volley

          For example, like the "Tornadoes".
          Initially, on the active part of the trajectory, its correction occurs. Real customized to ideal. Then, in the target area, the ANN gives the command to separate the warhead taking into account the deviation of the trajectory from the ideal one. Which reduces range dispersion.
    3. Lopatov 18 March 2020 17: 53 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: novel xnumx
      if the system is volley, then accuracy is not important, and if the system is high-precision, then volleying is no longer needed
      ps you yourself are the captain of evidence!

      Everything is much more complicated.
      By the way, guided missile is not necessarily high precision.
      1. novel66 18 March 2020 18: 41 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        why manage. if there is no precision?
        1. Lopatov 18 March 2020 19: 21 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: novel xnumx
          why manage. if there is no precision?

          To reduce dispersion.

          Well, "high-precision" is a striking target with a probability of more than 50%
  3. Operator 18 March 2020 12: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What was that? laughing
    1. dzvero 18 March 2020 12: 23 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Fortune telling by quote. A new sport.
  4. infantryman2020 18 March 2020 13: 50 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The article is about nothing.
    But slogans are present.
  5. Nikolaevich I 18 March 2020 13: 54 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Frankly, the information content of the article is so-so! In a manner ...: The priest had a dog ... he loved her .... "Everything flows, everything changes ... and the views on the role, the significance of the MLRS ... also change the MLRS themselves! With the equipment of the systems Adjustable, high-precision munitions of the installation are not exactly "MLRS"! This already turns out to be special (yes, "specific" ...!) multifunctional (!) missile weapons ... in some cases, retaining the ability to fulfill the "old" role of MLRS! For some reason, it seems to me that in Russia, in the Moscow Region, they don’t quite understand this! That’s why such "body ... technical movements" in the direction of "improving" missile systems like MLRS ... For example, why there is no proper attention to multi-caliber systems ? "Hurricane-1M" is a good idea! But ... (!): 1. How many such systems are in the Russian troops (?) ... or not at all ... only, on paper?
    2. Why is the caliber-122 mm missing? : 3. Is there a 30-barrel 220-mm launcher in real life, and not on a mock-up? 4. Have you ever considered using tactical missiles (1 mm) in Uragan-400,600M? Or consider, for example, the Tornado-G system ...! How, especially, does the acre ACS and some other “nuances”, “Tornado-G” differs from BM-21 “Grad”? Difficult to answer! One could talk about the new Tornado-G system if: 1. packages of 122 mm RS were introduced in fiberglass TPKs (which, possibly, allowed to increase the number of guides ...); 2. Developed Eres with detachable warhead; 3. Somewhere (maybe even the Turks ...) developed a 122-mm Eres with satellite correction ... for 122 mm, maybe it's too "bold", on ... anyway! ;4. Perhaps the Tornado-G system would become "multi-caliber" ... for example, they would add another "caliber" ... like 140 mm ... Or a substantial modernization would have resulted in 122, 220, 300 mm rocket launchers ...! Now ... there is talk of development ... there is nothing to present in real life! The 300-mm Eres with the UAV remained in the "project"! But have there been at least some 300 mm eres with satellite correction, or have "samples for the exhibition" remained? The author mentions some "homing" shells ... are these the same? Does the author of the tornado shells with satellite correction call it "homing"? request Or warhead with SPBE? In general, nothing concrete .... an article for the "pioneer" magazine "Military Knowledge", recommended for the leaders of the army units ...
    1. Lopatov 18 March 2020 18: 00 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      With the equipping of systems with adjustable, high-precision ammunition, the installations are not exactly "MLRS"! This already turns out to be a special (yes at least, "specific" ...!) Multifunctional (!) Missile weapons ... in some cases, preserving the ability to play the "old" role of MLRS! For some reason, it seems to me that in Russia, in the Moscow Region, they do not quite understand this

      And they do it right that they don’t understand.
      To not rubbish in the style of Americans.
      At first, actually abandoning the MLRS, then swirling a ton of money in an attempt to teach the artillery to shoot long-range missiles ...
      1. Nikolaevich I 19 March 2020 01: 41 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Spade
        And they do it right that they don’t understand.
        To not rubbish in the style of Americans.

        Well, how to say ... how to say! Even in Soviet times, the Moscow Region "took an example" from the Americans in terms of armaments! Usually (or, most often) some type of weapon appeared among the Americans ... and then "almost without fail" - in the SA! It used to be so ... in the USSR the first to develop any type of weapons, but in the Ministry of Defense did not rush to take it into service. And only after it became known that the Americans had developed and are adopting a similar type of weapon, and in the USSR they "got down to business"! Once, I even had a list of new types of weapons, which first appeared in the American army, and then soon in the Soviet ...