The Sarma multiple launch rocket system is undergoing testing in a special operation zone.

Sarma at the Motovilikha Plants exhibition, September 2025. Still from a Channel One report.

In order to further develop domestic jet artillery A new multiple launch rocket system, the Sarma, was recently developed. This prototype has now reached the stage of field testing and, presumably, small-scale production. The new MLRS, in its technical appearance and characteristics, differs significantly from existing models of its class. It is precisely these differences that determine the project's prospects.

On development stage

As a reminder, the updated concept for multiple rocket launch systems (MLRS) for ground forces was formulated back in the 2000s. It envisioned the creation of a combat vehicle on a truck chassis with a simplified and lightweight launcher. This MLRS was intended to offer an optimal balance of operational and combat characteristics.

In the middle of the decade, Motovilikha Plants (Perm) developed the experimental 9K58-4 Kama MLRS based on a new concept. A few years later, they unveiled a modified version with different armament. Testing of this system continued until 2012, after which all work was halted. The Ministry of Defense decided to abandon the development of new MLRS systems and focus on modernizing existing ones.

The rejected ideas were revived in 2022-23 after an analysis of the performance and use of MLRS in the Special Operation to Protect Donbas. Experience with rocket artillery demonstrated that the troops required not only several Tornado modifications, but also a new system with a different balance of characteristics.

At the same time, Motovilikha Plants received an order to develop a new MLRS. The project was codenamed "Sarma," after the river flowing into Lake Baikal and one of the local winds. Initially, this development remained secret, but by 2023, it was first mentioned in Russian media.

A reduced-size package of Sarma guide rails. Photo by the Russian Ministry of Defense.

At the end of that year, the Rostec state corporation announced that work on the Sarma was progressing, and the first serial MLRSs were expected to be built in the spring of 2024. Later, in September 2025, the design of the new combat vehicle was revealed. Motovilikha Plants displayed it at an exhibition organized for the visit of President Vladimir Putin. The Sarma then appeared at a training ground.

At the production stage

According to news According to Rostec, serial production of the Sarma began more than two years ago and yielded its first results. However, no details of these processes have been officially disclosed. Only information about the existence of at least one new MLRS has become publicly known.

In October 2025, the foreign press allegedly published official procurement documents from the Russian Ministry of Defense. According to them, back in 2024, the ministry had ordered two divisional sets of the Sarma MLRS. These were to include 12 self-propelled launchers and the same number of transporter-loader vehicles.

However, the veracity of this information is highly questionable. The origin and details of the purchases cited cast doubt on their veracity. It could have been a hoax or a provocation by foreign powers.

It's conceivable that production MLRS of the new model would have been deployed to the Special Operation zone. They could have demonstrated their potential in real combat conditions and confirmed their estimated performance. However, it is currently unknown whether the Sarma has undergone such tests. Information on this may become available in the near future.

300mm 9M549 guided rockets. These munitions were developed for the Tornado-G but can be used with the Sarma. Photo: Missilery.info

Technical features

The Sarma system is generally similar to other domestic MLRS systems, but has a number of important differences. These differences stem from the need to improve certain characteristics, simplify operation, and so on. However, such innovations do not negatively impact the overall potential or combat capabilities.

The Sarma system consists of several main components and assets: a self-propelled launcher, a transporter and loader vehicle, compatible ammunition, and a set of additional equipment. In this regard, the new MLRS is fundamentally no different from others.

Both MLRS vehicles are built on the KAMAZ-63501 chassis. This is a four-axle, all-terrain platform with high load-carrying capacity. The chassis is equipped with an armored cabover configuration. The rear of the vehicle houses the launcher or ammunition carriers.

The Sarma launcher is a mobile base with a swinging launcher stack. Guidance in two planes is accomplished manually or remotely. The stack is equipped with six 300mm tubular launchers, similar to those found on the Smerch/Tornado-S MLRS.

The MLRS must have a modern electronic fire control system. It must include a ballistic computer, navigation and communications equipment, as well as guidance and launch control devices. Such a fire control system is likely similar to those found in the Tornado system.

300mm model missiles 9M544. The folded rudders and cluster warhead are visible in the demonstration configuration. Photo: Missilery.info

The new Sarma is designed to fire 300mm rockets from the Smerch or Tornado-S MLRS. Apparently, it is compatible with the full range of such munitions, allowing it to accomplish a variety of combat missions. This allows the Sarma to engage various types of point or area targets, lay mines, and so on. Its firing range, depending on the munition type, is at least 80-90 km.

Optimal characteristics

At its core, the new Sarma MLRS is a redesigned, improved, and simplified version of the Tornado-S. Interestingly, the design changes, component replacements, and other improvements have not significantly impacted the overall performance. Despite its different characteristics, this multiple launch rocket system has advantages and should find a place in the military.

The Sarma is based on a Kama Automobile Plant truck. The Tornado-S, meanwhile, is built on a special four-axle MZKT chassis. The KAMAZ vehicle is simpler and less expensive to manufacture and operate. At the same time, its technical and operational characteristics are fully consistent with its role as a rocket launcher.

A key feature of the Sarma is crew protection. Unlike existing systems, it is equipped with an armored cabin as standard. This significantly improves crew safety during combat operations. Apparently, the MLRS can also be equipped with additional add-on protection against current threats.

The new MLRS did not develop its own ammunition, and must use existing missiles. This offers obvious advantages in terms of production, supply, and combat use. Moreover, the Sarma, using projectiles with various payloads, is capable of solving a wide range of combat missions.

A Tornado-S MLRS with 300-mm rockets in action. Photo by the Russian Ministry of Defense.

The use of a fully-fledged fire control system offers clear advantages. It can automatically, quickly, and accurately perform the necessary calculations, as well as control aiming and firing. Furthermore, the system can be standardized with other MLRS systems, which is also an important factor.

The new Sarma, unlike the Smerch and Tornado-S, carries half the ammunition. Because of this, it has a theoretically inferior strike area and area-effect capability. However, recent experience has shown that rocket artillery is not always required to fire area-effect salvos. They are often relied on to engage single, small targets. MLRSs are used as a type of tactical missile system.

With a limited ammunition complement, the Sarma can fire at single or area targets and demonstrate acceptable performance in all cases. If such a MLRS does not meet the planned fire mission in terms of salvo size, multiple combat vehicles or a different type of system can be used.

Simpler and cheaper

Thus, in accordance with the original concept, the new Sarma is a simplified and cost-effective analogue of the Tornado-S with similar characteristics. This MLRS is intended to be deployed to rocket artillery units and complement their existing 300mm systems. Recently, the new system underwent the necessary testing, confirming its design characteristics and meeting customer expectations. This paved the way for the launch of serial production.

The Sarma system is expected to provide troops with several new combat and operational capabilities. Furthermore, it will make rocket artillery a more flexible and versatile tool. The first steps in this direction have already been taken—the advanced MLRS has entered serial production and is likely already being deployed to units.

Comments

[Mikhail Nasharashev]

More tubes that need to be loaded in the field. Don't they really pay attention to container-based reloading like the Hymars? Or don't they realize it's much more convenient and faster?

[IVZ]

More tubes that need to be loaded in the field. Don't they really pay attention to container-based reloading like the Hymars? Or don't they realize it's much more convenient and faster?

It just "came to mind" that batch loading doesn't allow for multiple different missile types in a launcher, and that firing the entire batch in salvo isn't always (very rarely) necessary. It's better to have the ability to reload the launcher, i.e., simply refill the ammunition. The cost of ammunition and the labor intensity of its manufacture, which affect production volumes, also play a role. Overall, however, the cabin armor that has finally appeared and the chassis standardization with the army's vehicle fleet are encouraging.

[Netl]

Quote: IVZ

chassis unification with the army vehicle fleet

Besides standardization, the main advantage here is the significantly lighter design thanks to a smaller vehicle and fewer missiles. You don't have to worry about whether this heavy thing will fit on the bridge or fall through and become easy prey for enemy drones.

Mobility is everything in modern warfare! And the ability to launch a bunch of expensive missiles in a single burst is completely unnecessary. Previously, burst launches compensated for poor accuracy, but now we can cover a specific target rather than an ellipse.

[Brenneke]

And the ability to quickly charge the battery pack in the field? And without a transport/charging vehicle! The pack was delivered by any truck...

[IVZ]

Yes, that's great, of course, but the views from the couch and from the LBS, in terms of priorities, don't always coincide. If necessary

Is it possible to quickly charge the pack in the field? And without a transport and charging vehicle!!!

, I think this problem will be solved.

[Cartridge]

Trucks through the fields? Yep... Have you ever been to a training ground in winter?

[Amin_vivec]

The modern principle used in the SVO is to move to a point, fire within a minute, and then run until you're hit with return fire. Then the vehicle is driven into a pre-prepared shelter, and the crew on motorcycles leaves the area—a reconnaissance drone can monitor the vehicle, so there's no point in losing the crew and vehicle. Reloading will occur later if the shelter isn't detected. The crew on motorcycles then heads to another sheltered position, where loaded vehicles await.
Reloading in the field is not about the SVO.

[wladimirjankov]

In September 2025, the appearance of the new combat vehicle was revealed. Motovilikha Plants displayed it at an exhibition organized for the visit of President Vladimir Putin. The Sarma then appeared at one of the training grounds.

Most likely, another mockup for parades and exhibitions. It's the same story as with the Armata tank, the Kaolitsiya self-propelled howitzer, the Kurganets infantry fighting vehicle, the Boomerang armored personnel carrier, the Hermes, and so on. They're supposedly on display at parades and on display, but for some reason, the army still doesn't have them. We're fighting with BMP-1s, BMP-2s, BTR-82As, and T-72s and T-80s that are 30-50 years old. They've even started using 130mm M-46 guns from the 50s and 60s. They were recently featured in a TV report.

[iommy]

There is experience with the Uragan-1M, apparently the package is not so necessary than just dimensions, wheels and a theoretically larger number of launchers

[Cool90]

The packages also need to be charged in the field, and why rush such systems? No intelligence service can provide data every five minutes.

[Piramidon]

Quote: Mikhail Nasharashev

Don't they really pay attention to container reloading like the Hymars?

American doesn't mean better.

[Zaurbek]

Well, specifically regarding Himars, we have reviews from victims, usage statistics, and data on the usefulness of the Himars-Atakms Caliber replacement.

[rotfuks]

Well, specifically for Himars, we have reviews from victims, statistics on its use, and data on its usefulness.

Characteristically, these weapons are primarily used in civilian cities, and the victims are usually civilians. It appears that these weapons are not used in civilian areas and are designed as a deterrent to civilians.

[Zaurbek]

What is characteristic is that it was successfully used in the LBS zone in both the Himars and Atakms variants, moreover, with the advanced NATO RC system.

[Andrey_i_K]

I completely agree! I wanted to write this, but I saw your indignation. Or are you ashamed to admit the superiority of this scheme?! There's a good saying: a smart person won't be offended, but won't understand. This applies to our Ministry of Defense and government.

[shikin]

Where's "in the field"? The same Hymars, after launch, quickly retreats tens of kilometers from the LBS and reloads there (relatively) calmly. In this case, the difference isn't that big, especially since a transporter-loader vehicle is absolutely essential (the Smerch's shell weighs 800 kg, after all). And with the package, a third vehicle, like a crane, would likely be needed. Still, reloading 800 kg versus over 5 tons is a big difference.
And yes, the variability of loading a single projectile is probably much greater than with a whole package. This can be especially important with guided missiles.

[spyder100]

The Hymars and MLPS have a crane built into the launcher, allowing them to load packages from both the vehicle and the ground, eliminating the need for additional cranes. Loading time with a package is faster. After firing, the MLRS must leave its position and reload as quickly as possible; no one will be reloading one shell at a time while still in the firing position.

[shikin]

No one will reload one shell at a time at a combat position

- Yes, and no one will reload with a pack at a combat position either. And in the close rear, a pack is, of course, quicker to reload, but the pack itself also needs to be reloaded somewhere. If the crew does all this, then where's the benefit? And if additional forces need to be brought in, the question again is: is it profitable? Overall, I definitely wouldn't consider a pack a plus (certainly not in all cases).

[spyder100]

The package is factory-loaded; it's hermetically sealed and requires no maintenance during storage. A crane for loading is built into the launcher. There are many resources on this topic available online.

[shikin]

I see. So, the packages are transported back and forth and loaded at the factory? And the entire package, of course, contains the same type of ammunition.
In general, nothing is ideal; every solution has its pros and cons.

[spyder100]

The bag is DISPOSABLE. It's plastic, like an RPG tube. No need to take it to the factory. Just shoot it and throw it away.

[shikin]

Yes, that's right. The guides are composite, the body is metal.
In my opinion, the solution is controversial. Changing the package at the designated location definitely increases efficiency several times over. If, after firing, you immediately return to base to reload in relatively safe conditions, the efficiency decreases sharply. And additional costs for the packages (and possibly their subsequent disposal) are added.
Although yes, working with a package is easier and faster than with individual shells.

[lynnot]

Both the Haimars and the MLPS have a crane built into the launcher, which can pick up packages from both a vehicle and the ground, without the need for any additional cranes.

Judging by the photos I've seen, their crane is primarily used for loading packages from the ground. At least, I haven't yet seen any photos or videos of them being loaded directly from a transporter.

[Totor5]

It seems like at an exhibition 10 years ago, there were bags lying nearby.

[U-58]

In principle, it's clear that this system is a response to real-world combat experience. The number of guides has been reduced due to their redundancy on the Smerch, and the vehicle base has been updated. This ensures increased mobility on the battlefield and reduces the time it takes to prepare the next salvo.
And production has become relatively cheaper. This means we have a much more cost-effective weapon option that doesn't compromise combat capabilities.

[Bogalex]

This means we have a much more economical weapon option that does not reduce combat capabilities.

More economical - yes, but as for “not reducing combat capabilities” - hardly.
Yes, in modern conditions, large-caliber MLRSs don't deliver multiple rocket strikes. But is this because strikes with such a large number of rockets are objectively unnecessary, or because the capabilities for such strikes simply don't exist? I believe the latter is more accurate.

[U-58]

Firing at large areas is an inefficient way to waste ammunition. Conversely, using guided missiles with target guidance requires one or two pinpoint strikes. So, calculate how many guides are needed.

[Bogalex]

Area shooting is an irrational way of wasting ammunition.

Sorry, but this is a deeply erroneous opinion.
Situations can and do arise on the battlefield that by no means require "one or two pinpoint strikes" due to the impossibility of delivering them. The target's location cannot always be known with the required accuracy. For example, a weapon that suddenly opens fire on our advancing troops must be silenced immediately, not after 15-20-30 minutes, while an attack drone reaches its area. In this case, the same radar or sound reconnaissance systems will detect its coordinates with an error, rendering a precision-guided strike pointless. But an MLRS, by delivering an area strike, will force this weapon to either change position or drive its crew into cover—in short, to cease fire. And at a given moment, those very minutes, while the enemy's weapon is silent, may be enough for our soldiers in assault units to escape the fire zone and survive.
And this is just one example.

[Cool90]

If they need more missiles, they'll use Tornados. Don't forget, they're not going anywhere.

[Bogalex]

Are you naive to believe that MLRS like "Sarma" and "Tornado-S" are standing "wheel to wheel" along the entire 2000 km of the LBS: if you want to use one, use another?

[Cool90]

Why do you attribute beliefs to me?

The Tornado-S and Sarma are self-propelled artillery of the VGK reserve, and they will be used according to intelligence data, and then headquarters will be able to determine which is better to strike (Sarma, Tornado-S, or Iskander).

[Bogalex]

Tornado-S and Sarma are self-propelled artillery of the VGK reserve.

Both Tornado-S and Sarma belong to the missile forces, not to the artillery.
They are not a means of the "VGK reserve".
These systems are typically used at the unit level, not at the group level. It's logical to assume that a specific rocket artillery brigade will be equipped with ONE type of combat vehicle, so the commander of a specific unit won't have both the Tornado-S and Sarma at his disposal. Even if this were to happen, given his broad responsibilities, no sane commander would deploy two types of combat vehicles in the same positional area simply to be able to fire different types of rockets for a specific situation.

and they will be used according to intelligence data and the headquarters will be able to determine what is the best strike

All missile forces and artillery are used in this manner, but the selection of a specific unit to carry out a fire mission or strike is made by headquarters primarily based on the target's reach and nature. However, situations where the commander is forced to select a fire weapon based on the suitability of a specific munition that other systems cannot employ (for example, to destroy a tank, it would be necessary to use the Msta rather than the Giatsint, since the latter cannot operate the Krasnopoly) are considered BOLD MINUS our artillery weapons system, and add a lot of headaches to those who use it.

[Dedok]

If they need more missiles, they'll use Tornados. Don't forget, they're not going anywhere.

And all these MLRS - they stand (in a line on the parade ground) and wait - who will they give the order to?
or do they give orders to those who are nearby?

[Cool90]

Army headquarters give orders to such missile systems, and they may have both Tornado-S and Sarma at hand

[Dedok]

such missile systems army headquarters give orders and they might have both a tornado and a sarma on hand

Tell me, you apparently know how long it takes for such an order to reach the Contractor?
and how much time does the Contractor need before starting his work (to charge up and move out)?
And lastly: what do you think, the target that needs to be hit - will someone “tie” it to “this” time???

[Cool90]

Why are you writing this to me? I don't work at headquarters, and neither do you. So we don't know how much time is needed. But the Patriot, Hymars, and Iris systems destroyed in the video say they have plenty of time.

[Dedok]

Why are you writing this to me?, I, like you, do not work at headquarters

So I'm writing to you not just like that, but in response to the stupidity that you, with a smart look, are spreading here...

[Cool90]

What's stupid about this is that missile systems like Sarma and Tornado-S are part of the VGK reserve and they receive orders from army headquarters.
I didn't make up the staffing list and I don't give orders
You are writing nonsense and for some reason you attribute your stupidity to me *they are standing (in a line on the parade ground)* = I didn’t write this

[Dedok]

and sdes It's stupid if missile systems like the Sarma and Tornado-S are part of the VGK reserve and receive orders from army headquarters.

The 4th year of the war is ending...the fourth Charles!
and you live - still in the years of "peaceful" time with "his" Statutes, Instructions, etc.
Time goes by, but there are NO conclusions (from 4 years of military action)!
It's the same as with the camera at the Novorossiysk base, we thought, we wondered, and then:

Details of the enemy attack on the Varshavyanka submarine in the port of Novorossiysk have emerged. By personal order of Black Sea Fleet Commander-in-Chief Admiral Sergei Mikhailovich Pinchuk, the port's surveillance camera, which does not allow network access, was switched to broadcast mode via VKontakte for his personal remote monitoring from his office. The enemy monitored the attack via this broadcast.
It is interesting that at the beginning of January 2026, the commander demanded that several more similar broadcasts be made to his office from other cameras and objects - the lesson would not have been learnedl.

[Cool90]

The Americans fought for 20 years and eventually shit their pants and fled dressed in women's clothing and clinging to the landing gear of airplanes.
For two years now, the Jews have been unable to defeat a dozen Hamas militants armed with sticks and stones in an area the size of a forester's toilet.
and you are not currently conducting a dialogue with a general, I do not influence the charter and instructions

[Dedok]

and you are not currently conducting a dialogue with a general, I do not influence the charter and instructions

?
It wasn't me, but you who started talking about "army headquarters"...
So, there's no need to write about things that are beyond your competence...

For two years now, the Jews have been unable to defeat a dozen Hamas militants armed with sticks and stones in an area the size of a forester's toilet.

Were you in Lebanon in 1982? To talk about this, among other things? Or not?
So why not answer the question directly?
and come up with some ridiculous excuses?
Ask the Israelis present here, and they will answer about both Hezbollah and the forester's house...

[Cool90]

Once again for those who are slow: I wrote to you about the standard equipment that is freely available,
You're writing about something that's beyond your competence.
Why are you writing about 1982? I'm writing to you about modern times.
And how can one deny that the Jews have been unable to seize the forester's toilet for two years now?
And what can the Jews say except that they conquer everyone with their hats?

[multi-category]

Quote: Dedok

Were you in Lebanon in 1982?

In 1982, there were three times as many Palestinians and territories where Israel is now located. And the situation is different.

[bayard]

Quote: Dedok

the lesson was not learned.

Or maybe it's the other way around—he saw how effectively he could leak information to the enemy and decided to scale up the effect. I don't believe in stupidity. Even "admiral" stupidity. Nor in laziness and sloppiness. Where's the work of the Special Department, counterintelligence, and the Black Sea Fleet's chief of communications? Or are they all subordinate to him, and therefore share full responsibility?

As for the new TPU for guided (!!) tactical missiles, six launch tubes is the optimal ammunition load for one vehicle. If a massive strike is required, simply increase the number of such vehicles in a salvo. But this is definitely not an MLRS, since firing unguided missiles of this caliber and cost "into the wide world" is irrational. It is rational to fire guided missiles. With a range of up to 120 km (and not "80-90 km," as the author states) and a warhead weighing 250-300 kg (and not 200 kg like the Smerch's unguided missile), this is a fully functional TPU and is therefore capable of hitting both point and area targets. It's just that to hit the latter, a cluster warhead is used... in which the cassette's striking elements can also be homing.
In a word, a more powerful functional analogue of the same "Hymars", fortunately, they have also already abandoned the NUR.
In the next stage, we would like to obtain a guided missile for this system with a range of 200 km, albeit with a slight reduction in warhead weight. We would also really not want to lose a caliber such as the 220 mm "Uragan", but with the advent of a guided munition for it (since so far only old-style NURs are available), it might be worth considering creating a new TPU for the "Uragan" / "Tornado-U". As well as a new guided missile for it with a range of 80-100 km and a warhead weight of up to 100 kg. Tactical targets for this caliber (220 mm) will be far more numerous, and their destruction will be much cheaper than doing so with the "Sarma" OTRK. This includes performing counter-battery warfare missions using the Krasnopol guidance system with laser illumination from a drone.

[alexoff]

Well, maybe someday we'll have normal communications and properly functioning headquarters...

[Cartridge]

And you should train as a missile or artillery specialist, and then you won't ask such ridiculous questions. There are duty units, and there are "others" that are assigned to "readiness 1," etc. Such systems are in service with army brigades. The time for the "control system response" = the time it takes to transmit a command from the army's missile and artillery unit via a direct line to the brigade commander + the time it takes to send a command to the MLRS (launcher) + guidance and salvo (launch). And then quickly, quickly to the loading area... To speed things up, such systems (in "readiness") can be in direct communication with the missile and artillery unit (exceptional situations). It depends on the tasks being performed. In general, such systems are not designed to fire at individual targets. Their tasks are: mining, dropping reconnaissance drones, destroying a group of weapons and military equipment, and destroying the defense and security forces in concentration areas.

[U-58]

The practice of the SVO, even reflected in reports, shows that even the Grad missiles don't fire a full salvo. And I don't think this is due to a shortage of shells.
It's a good thing that creating a lunar landscape without practical results has become bad form.

[multi-category]

Oh yes, I remember footage from around 2016, when multiple rocket launchers were shelling an empty field where there weren't even any trenches, let alone equipment or other objects. And then, when the Second World War began, there suddenly wasn't enough shells—I saw the moon Mariupol had been turned into.
Times have changed—ammunition is now being conserved. They're no longer being transported by the thousands of train cars.

[alexoff]

Quote: U-58

And I don’t think it’s due to a lack of ammunition.

Considering how many RAV depots we've had burn down, both before and during the SVO, and considering that the Russian Ministry of Defense has never been fond of purchasing expendable missiles and shells, since you can't carry them on parade...

[Cool90]

It's quite possible to rain hail on such guns (they haven't gone anywhere either), and the reserve artillery of the VGK, which includes the SARM, will be used against point targets, including guns if they know the coordinates

[multi-category]

Quote: Kull90

And where does the reserve artillery of the VGK belong?

I don't want to lecture, but in my opinion your views are 50 years out of date.
Right now, the frontline zone alone is about 30 kilometers long. To even hit anything, you need a range of at least 60-70 km. It's time to get used to the idea that assets with a range of 50-120 km should be fully subordinated to battlefield command.

[multi-category]

The tasks are different, including in terms of area.

[Goldmitro]

Area shooting is an irrational way of wasting ammunition.

Is the accuracy of our MLRS systems known? Videos of our MLRS systems in action, particularly Grads, show a wide spread of shells, likely extending up to 100 meters or more. With such a spread, the probability of hitting a target cannot be high, leading to a massive expenditure of ammunition and no guarantee of destruction.

[Cartridge]

The GRAD MLRS is not designed for random fire. It is designed to engage multiple targets over a large area, including exposed personnel and vehicles. The minimum target size is 500 x 500 meters.

[Askold65]

I prefer the Polonez MLRS layout. It has two pods of four missiles each, for a total of eight missiles. But, in principle, it's possible to develop missiles with increased range and firepower by using two pods instead of eight. It's the same universal launcher concept as on the HIMARS/ATACMS.

[alexoff]

In the context of the tornado, area strikes are unclear. If we take the CEP of old Soviet shells, it would be three times greater than the lethal radius of a high-explosive fragmentation charge at long range. And to hit a conventional weapon, you'd need not just a SARM, but three tornadoes, quickly deployed across a square. It would certainly be nice to have an army capable of launching trainloads of missiles to save Private Rakov, but with such an army, we'd have Kyiv in three days and Lviv in a week, and Private Rakov would have arrived at enemy positions pre-destroyed by tornadoes just to poke corpses with a stick.
And so, three guided missiles with cluster warheads in a circle. And why does everyone think we need more launchers? We have 1,500 barrels for 130 launchers, and we have a mega-factory churning out Tornado missiles like sausages, a thousand a day? Something tells me no. I'm not sure we produce that many missiles for Grad missiles, and those use ballistic propellant, not composite fuel, and there's no guidance.

[Bogalex]

300mm 9M549 guided rockets. These munitions were developed for the Tornado-G, but can be used with the Sarma.

For the 122mm MLRS "Tornado-G" 300mm shells?

[Yuri L]

And again, a maximum range of 120 km? Why do our Chinese brothers always start counting the range of their missiles in this caliber at 300 km? And our only allies also start counting the range at 200 km for their 300 mm caliber. Maybe the designers at Splav Holding should learn how to build MLRS?

[Cool90]

For greater range there is an Iskander

[by land]

The Americans have already begun production of the GMLRS-ER multiple launch rocket system with a range of 150 km. This is almost twice the range of the old HIMARS missile, achieved simply by reducing the weight of the airframe and guidance systems using modern materials and a highly efficient rocket motor. I think we need to do something similar.

[multi-category]

You've got something mixed up. 300 km is a vastly excessive range for most missions. Including that in the baseline is a bit of a stretch. For most situations today, a range of 80-100 km is sufficient.

[alexoff]

Is anyone even asking for it? As far as I remember, the 120 km was developed in the 1990s for a foreign customer, but the generals didn't need it. The guided missile, which was offered for export in the early 2000s, was accepted into service in 2019, I think, and was purchased literally one at a time.

[lDaive]

Chinese multiple launch rocket systems are designed this way for a reason—they need to close the Taiwan Strait. Although I also believe that if the new Russian long-range MLRS has a range of only 120 km, that's clearly insufficient.

[would]

Which Chinese 300mm MLRS has a range of 300 km?

The WS-1B has a range of 180 km.

There's the WS-23, but it's a whopping 400mm caliber. Its maximum range is 200 km, or 400 km for the WS3D. But it's more of a tactical missile system than an MLRS.

[Vadim S]

What am I seeing? Finally, all the vehicles have armored cabins?! They spent so much time discussing this before the war, so many projects, but the answer was always the same: too expensive! And now it finally dawns on me that life is actually more valuable, it's hard to believe. In our country, life has never been particularly valued, and this isn't my comment; I simply agree with it completely.

[Dedok]

What am I seeing? Finally, all the vehicles have armored cabins?!

I'm interested in something else: how much money was spent - but in fact, this is a modernization of the old...

[dragon772]

The fact that armored cabins for the crew have appeared is very good.
For example, North Korea has KN-09 multiple launch rocket systems, which have a range of 220 km. Their caliber is 300 mm. The warhead weighs 190 kg.
And we have 120 km. We need to increase the range!

[multi-category]

Quote: dragon772

We need to increase the range!

Why? It's a special theater of operations there, you can't bring artillery everywhere, and the range might be needed.
And where can you expect an MLRS to fire 300 km from a flatland? Well then, why bother with small talk? Let's build a monster system so it can reach Lviv or Lisbon, or even better, Baltimore, from the Moscow region. Let's get a 12k range!

[dragon772]

If there is an opportunity to make 300 km, then it must be done in order to avoid a counterattack.

[multi-category]

Quote: dragon772

If there is an opportunity to do 300 km, then it should be done.

No need. paranoids need to be dismissed from military service and transferred to work in internal intelligence services, and this will be done by very evil quartermasters.

[gribanov.c]

They should also develop a missile that launches a guided glide munition, from which the stage separates, which then taxis to the target, and further extends its range. Perhaps such a thing exists? So that a single missile could accurately hit a bridge, bunker, artillery piece, SAM system, or tactical missile system in position. At a range of up to 200 km (which isn't much, since the launcher itself, for safety, should be positioned 100 km from the front line). Then each of the six such missiles would be individually guided.

[matsur]

Quote: Bogalex

Area shooting is an irrational way of wasting ammunition.

Sorry, but this is a deeply erroneous opinion.
Situations can and do arise on the battlefield that by no means require "one or two pinpoint strikes" due to the impossibility of delivering them. The target's location cannot always be known with the required accuracy. For example, a weapon that suddenly opens fire on our advancing troops must be silenced immediately, not after 15-20-30 minutes, while an attack drone reaches its area. In this case, the same radar or sound reconnaissance systems will detect its coordinates with an error, rendering a precision-guided strike pointless. But an MLRS, by delivering an area strike, will force this weapon to either change position or drive its crew into cover—in short, to cease fire. And at a given moment, those very minutes, while the enemy's weapon is silent, may be enough for our soldiers in assault units to escape the fire zone and survive.
And this is just one example.

Pfft, yeah right. Anything, just not to develop. The US's pursuit of more precise weapons isn't teaching anyone anything. Yeah, it's not just about whipping up a pipe and stuffing it with TNT. You also need electronics, inventing and programming sophisticated guidance systems. Our grandfathers wore bast shoes, and we'll get by!
Creating a missile that receives the "no-friends-here" directive upon flight and identifies its target is no big deal. Okay, then give the missile a target with a presumed target location: a specific house, a trench, a landing. Isn't that a chance to destroy it or force a ceasefire? Still complicated?
Because of thoughts like yours, we can't even tear down bridges.

[multi-category]

Quote from Matsur

Pff, yeah right. Anything but develop.

You won't believe it, but the US still has 57mm unguided rockets from the Vietnam War in its arsenal, and no one seems to care. They even recently made a special version for extended-range aircraft. They're happy with these bast shoes. Understand, the military needs DIFFERENT weapons.
Before the SVO, they laughed at the new American 60mm mortar, saying we have 81mm, 120mm, and even bigger ones, so why would they need such an archaic weapon? But it turns out it has a very convenient and useful niche on the battlefield, because it's the lowest-noise caliber.
If they do something strange from your point of view, first study it, then criticize.

[Stanislav Chernov]

When will they finally get around to containerized payloads? Isn't it clear that a universal platform is far more necessary than yet another Torch variant? I doubt we can produce unlimited quantities of command modules with a guidance system. It would be logical to create a platform that could launch a modified Iskander, fire a high-precision Torch salvo, lay mines, and cover with conventional NURs. Another aspect is reload speed: dropping a container and throwing a new one is much faster than manually loading missiles, and in the context of constant drone surveillance, this is an important factor.

[Grits]

Maybe it's easier to copy the Himars? After all, the Americans have created a very good thing. Precise, powerful, dual-caliber. Unlike the Kamaz, it doesn't have eight wheels, but is lightweight and capable of off-roading.

[sas711]

The main thing is not the launcher itself, but its missiles. The SVO has shown that area-of-effect fire is rarely required; precision is essential. That's why Hymars missiles are much more useful than tornadoes and hurricanes.
If there are new shells, there will be a point. If there are no shells, there is no point in changing the installations.

[Cool90]

The projectiles are 9M542 and the use of these missiles can often be observed on Lostmar

[multi-category]

A key feature of the Sarma is crew protection. Unlike existing systems, it is equipped with an armored cabin as standard. This significantly improves crew safety during combat operations.

Yes? What is the protection class of this protection?
Will it definitely be able to protect against factors such as fragments from D-30 high-explosive shells?
Something in the photo didn't seem that way to me.

[Ban Zai]

The war of attrition makes significant adjustments

[Zaurbek]

A 600mm rocket with similar technology wouldn't hurt either.

[Phoenix Point]

I wonder why our military leaders went down the "chimera" route? When facts meet reality, it turns into an "experiment." In fact, this isn't a replacement for the excellent Smerch! It's a specialized platform for specific tasks.

[hump]

An attempt to replicate Tornado S. The fate of the Hunter drone awaits, and they won't appear at the front, everyone will try

[AMG]

This is the author's third article dedicated to the development of multiple-barrel defense systems, including the creation of the Sarma system. The previous ones were published on November 7, 2025, and December 25, 2025. While the title of today's article sounds affirmative: "undergoing testing in a special operation zone," the text itself makes it unclear whether the system has passed state tests or is in serial production, despite numerous exhibition presentations. And it's even more unclear why they cite foreign press reports if they should be immediately questioned.

[Carlos Hall]

I don't like it. It looks like a copy of Western models, and I think the Russian ones are better.

[the same doctor]

Today, any MLRS must be converted into a multi-barrel launcher for independently targetable missiles. This requires target reconnaissance and in-flight adjustments. The ultimate goal: to hit the target with all eyes, and ultimately achieve "one target, one missile." The task is quite simple, if the authorities are willing to fund the R&D and subsequent production.
Secondly, we need to ensure that the missiles are positioned and launched in unmanned mode. This is also very simple, but it requires funding. If the missiles' flight is guided and the launcher is unmanned, then complex launchers become unnecessary. They can be simplified down to the simplest trailers with disposable tubes, loaded at the factory.
And finally, the command posts must have direct communication with the forward units. So that the missile launches 30 seconds after the target is detected by the sergeant on the front line. This isn't difficult, technically speaking.
...
A number of insurmountable problems for a single launcher become simpler when looking at combat situations from a more global perspective... However, today, with the new MLRS, we see yet another attempt to create an all-powerful monster instead of a cheap solution based on the interaction of simple devices... in the hands of representatives of different units. The result is once again kilometers of lunar landscape to destroy a single machine gun nest, a shortage of missiles, and the impossibility of use due to the risk of collateral civilian casualties.

[Strelok1976]

As someone with some knowledge on this particular topic, I'm amazed by what the commentators are writing. But I'm also baffled by the question of why only six guided missiles? Why, Karl? What's stopping them from filling their packages with partially guided and partially unguided missiles? Was the entire package produced only for testing, or only for the big shots... Or does anyone in any MLRS fire a full ammo pack, especially a 300mm one, at a fraction of the cost? Or does anyone know of any actual combat use of the entire package from the Smerch?

[alexoff]

Tornado never had unguided rockets; the most basic rockets came with a correction system.

[matsur]

Quote: multicaat

Quote from Matsur

Pff, yeah right. Anything but develop.

You won't believe it, but the US still has 57mm unguided rockets from the Vietnam War in its arsenal, and no one seems to care. They even recently made a special version for extended-range aircraft. They're happy with these bast shoes. Understand, the military needs DIFFERENT weapons.
Before the SVO, they laughed at the new American 60mm mortar, saying we have 81mm, 120mm, and even bigger ones, so why would they need such an archaic weapon? But it turns out it has a very convenient and useful niche on the battlefield, because it's the lowest-noise caliber.
If they do something strange from your point of view, first study it, then criticize.

What an argument. I'll go ahead and believe it! They can afford to keep any archaic artifacts; experience shows that if they don't use them themselves, they'll give them to those who are willing to rake in the dough for them. With a good owner, everything will rot away on its own.
But at the same time, they're completely obsessed with precision weapons. Besides the Nursas you mentioned, they have something that could literally fly through an enemy's window. What about us?
Judging by the number of downsides, I see a preponderance of people with your point of view. This also explains the problem with our weapons development, as well as many other things. How many years ago was Rogozin making fun of the Americans? Where is he now, and what place does our spaceflight occupy? How long ago did we start using drones? Need forced us, so we developed them.
As long as the idea "this will do!" is in our heads, we will never see a strong army.
I was taught that any know-how is based on an idea. First, figure out what you want, and then figure out how to achieve it. I'd like a single multiple-missile system to destroy a bridge with a single salvo of its missiles. The operator then chooses where to place the missiles—I want them to fire one after another at a single point, or I want each one to land in its own bay. Not just fire into the air for a month. Or the operator could select targets on the map with a couple of clicks, and the missiles would land precisely on them. Or hit every enemy building. Then the enemy would know they're living on credit if a reconnaissance drone flew overhead. Now, an artillery strike is like a lottery: you might get lucky, you might not.

[Same lech]

Quote: Cartridge

Minimum target dimensions are 500x500 m.

What is the dispersion of the shell fragments...what is the direction of the dispersion vector, what is the lethal range?

[Doctor]

MLRS. Originally created for chemical weapons. Katyushas included. The SQUARE needed to be covered.
They're basically unnecessary now. They're completely inferior to drones in terms of cost and efficiency. And they're noticeable, too.

[mi24mu]

The aforementioned "Tornado-S" is practically non-existent in the North-Eastern Military District.
At the very beginning there were videos, but for several years now there has been silence.

Apparently the ammunition is not produced or is produced in homeopathic quantities.
This means that either there is no need for such a system or it is too expensive/difficult to produce.

Hence the question: is this new MLRS not just another rip-off?

[Cool90]

For example, on LostAmore you can often see videos of 9M542 missiles landing from Tornado-s. Before writing a comment, it's better to study the topic, otherwise it turns out they're lying.