ATACMS: what missiles Kyiv can receive from Washington

In recent days, information has increasingly appeared in the American media about the Biden administration’s alleged readiness to supply long-range ATACMS missiles to Kyiv.

In Ukraine this weapon, already by tradition, is called a means that can turn the tide of the current confrontation, because it will be the longest-range missile at the disposal of the Ukrainian army. But is this really so?

It’s worth starting with the fact that the Armed Forces of Ukraine can receive for weapons.

ATACMS is a solid-fuel tactical surface-to-surface ballistic missile, the first version of which entered service in 1991.

MGM-140A ATACMS Block 1 (M39) received an inertial guidance system and can hit targets at a distance of about 165 km. The cluster warhead contains 950 submunitions. The circular probable deviation is 225 meters.

MGM-140B ATACMS Block 1A (М39А1) is a modification of the above-mentioned missile, adopted by the US Armed Forces in 1998, which received a range of up to 300 km and a GPS guidance system. However, the number of submunitions in the warhead was reduced to 275. But the hit accuracy increased to 23 meters.

In 2001, versions of the MGM-168A ATACMS Block 1A (M48) appeared with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead borrowed from the Harpoon anti-ship missile. The probable circular deflection of these missiles became ten meters, which gave them the opportunity to hit point targets.

Then, in 2004 and 2017, versions with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead MGM-164 ATACMS 2000 (M57) and MGM-164 ATACMS 2000 MOD (M57E1) appeared.

It is worth noting that ATACMS missiles are not currently produced in the United States. Stocks of previously released ammunition are estimated at 1239 units. M39, 536 units. M39A1, 118 units. M48, as well as 513 and 220 units each. M57 and M57E1 respectively.

At the same time, M39 and M39A1 are planned to be upgraded to the M57E1 version.

Now about what will be transferred to Ukraine. Most American experts agree that Kyiv will be given a test batch of M39s, of which the Pentagon has the most in stock.

Therefore, claims by Ukrainian authorities that ATACMS will be their longest-range missile are exaggerated. After all, the destruction range of this version does not exceed 165 km. The same British “Storm Shadow” strikes at 275 km.

In addition, the M39 has a cluster warhead, which can cause a lot of problems for infantry and lightly armored vehicles. But these missiles will definitely not change the course of the confrontation in favor of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Comments

[Factor]

The attacks of the Ukrainian Wehrmacht in recent weeks on Russian military installations in Crimea mark not less than the beginning of the battle for Crimea.

However, neither two attacks on the Crimean Bridge, nor the destruction of the positions of the unparalleled S-300/400 air defense systems, nor the destruction of a large landing ship (LHD) and a diesel submarine, coupled with the headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet, led to anything but the silence of the Kremlin. And there are good reasons for this.

Putin can convince himself and those around him as much as he wants that Crimea is “historically” Russian territory, but the rest of the world thinks otherwise.
The use of nuclear weapons by Russia as a response to attacks on Crimea, based on the Russian doctrine of the use of nuclear weapons, will be clearly and instantly assessed as nothing other than unjustified aggression, and not the defense of its territory.
This has long been reported to the Kremlin by both the West and the East in the person of India and China, and this week a completely unambiguous signal on this matter came from Putin’s close friend in oil affairs, Saudi Prince bin Salman.

The fact that Western missiles are used for attacks against Crimea, and that Western intelligence is also probably actively used, suggests that all taboos on attacks on Crimea have been lifted not only in words, but also in reality.
The ATACMS transferred to Ukraine are also likely intended primarily for attacks in Crimea: their cluster warheads are ideally suited for attacks on the numerous airfields, ammunition depots, logistics points and equipment storage bases located there, providing a large destruction area. They can also be successful when used against ships of the Black Sea Fleet: they won’t sink, but they are more than capable of disabling all external electronic equipment, turning warships into useless tin cans.

Washington’s transfer of these missiles to Kyiv opens up the opportunity for Scholz to send long-range German TAURUS missiles to Ukraine. Cluster munitions for HIMARS MLRS systems stored in Germany are also awaiting a decision, the dispatch of which may be much easier after the transfer of ATACMS cluster munitions. There is no doubt that in the future we can expect the transfer of these missiles with a high-explosive warhead in order to destroy pre-agreed targets. After the appearance of multi-role F-16 fighters in Ukraine, the position of the Russian army and the Black Sea Fleet in Crimea will become even more complicated.

The Black Sea Fleet, in less than two years of war with an army that had no fleet at all, managed to lose its flagship Moscow, aka “aircraft carrier killer,” two large landing craft, a diesel submarine and the ship “Spasatel Vasily Bekh” with the Tor anti-aircraft gun on board. And given the growing capabilities of the Ukrainian Armed Forces to strike at Crimea and Black Sea Fleet ships, these losses are far from the last.

This is the reality. So, what is next?

The Russian army is already using all types of weapons on its balance sheet against the Ukrainian Reich, except nuclear ones.
But the junta is still alive in Kyiv.

[shikin]

Regarding the destruction of a diesel boat and a large landing craft - it’s too loud, they are still similar.
Regarding the use of tactical nuclear weapons - with a single use, this will not lead to any serious changes at the front, but will cause another escalation - with a considerable degree of probability, tactical nuclear weapons will then appear in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. With massive use, there is a high probability of escalation to strategic nuclear weapons. I personally don’t see anything good in either the first or second case.
According to OTRK, we have been using Iskander for a long time, and not just as a piece. What change did he make at the front? Why will the use of OTRK by the Ukrainian Armed Forces be much more effective than ours? Yes, there is little good, but missiles alone cannot occupy territory and defeat an army. This is possible only with very competent use of all forces and means and with superiority in resources. Strategic breakthroughs, envelopments, cauldrons are impossible today if there is no overwhelming superiority (superiority in the breakthrough area is also difficult to achieve due to developed reconnaissance).
So, what is next? Apparently, it’s a war of resource depletion on both sides (I don’t only mean Ukraine).

[Escariot]

Quote from shikin

Regarding the destruction of a diesel boat and a large landing craft - it’s too loud, they are still similar.
Regarding the use of tactical nuclear weapons - with a single use, this will not lead to any serious changes at the front, but will cause another escalation - with a considerable degree of probability, tactical nuclear weapons will then appear in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. With massive use, there is a high probability of escalation to strategic nuclear weapons. I personally don’t see anything good in either the first or second case.
According to OTRK, we have been using Iskander for a long time, and not just as a piece. What change did he make at the front? Why will the use of OTRK by the Ukrainian Armed Forces be much more effective than ours? Yes, there is little good, but missiles alone cannot occupy territory and defeat an army. This is possible only with very competent use of all forces and means and with superiority in resources. Strategic breakthroughs, envelopments, cauldrons are impossible today if there is no overwhelming superiority (superiority in the breakthrough area is also difficult to achieve due to developed reconnaissance).
So, what is next? Apparently, it’s a war of resource depletion on both sides (I don’t only mean Ukraine).

One of the key advantages of our Army is that we constantly subject enemy rear areas to attacks right up to Lvov, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces do this extremely limitedly due to the lack of the necessary means. Now the enemy will have another tool, and in quite a large quantity. We will have to strengthen air defense, disperse warehouses and move airfields inland. The effectiveness of supporting ground forces will decrease. Not much pleasant.

[Vladimir Ryjkov]

Meanwhile, the military budget of the Russian Federation is 7 times higher than the healthcare budget. Roughly speaking, the stump wants to destroy its neighbors 7 times more than it wants to save “its” citizens. So let's keep shouting your hurray, it won't be long left and I'm not talking about the front, but about a short and unhealthy life ((

[Repellent]

Quote: Vladimir Ryjkov

not about the front, but about a short and unhealthy life

I would suggest you die now. You will be buried like a person, and the air will become cleaner.

[m4rtin.frost]

The Black Sea Fleet will soon be demilitarized! But obviously no one will be held accountable for this!