• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

AML - Autonomous Multi-Domain Launcher (LRPF-IFPC)

Kirkhill

Puggled and Wabbit Scot.
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
10,404
Points
1,160
I thought bringing these references into one place might be interesting.

The program intent seems to be to create a truck that combines the M270/HIMARS with NASAMs and/or Patriot with Tomahawk. The desire is for an autonomous or optionally manned vehicle that will fit in the back of a C-130 while carrying two pods of missiles.

1752763936606.png1752764218080.png
AUTONOMOUS MULTI-DOMAIN LAUNCHER (AML)

AML is a Long Range Precision Fires Cross Function Team, DEVCOM Aviation & Missile Center, and DEVCOM Ground Vehicle Systems Center Science and Technology initiative to develop and demonstrate an autonomous, unmanned, highly mobile, C-130 transportable launcher. The prototype launcher will be capable of leader-follower autonomy, autonomous way point navigation, drive-by-wire, and remote launcher turret and fire control operation. It will be capable of launching longer munitions while remaining compatible with the current munitions.




During its time at YPG, the AML launched three RRPRs in a successive ripple fire mission. In all, six RRPRs were successfully fired from the AML in a demonstration of the launcher’s ability to maneuver under supervised autonomy from a hide location to a firing point, turn to an assigned heading and execute fire control commands from a remote gunner position.

Over the past week leading up to the initial live fire, the AML successfully demonstrated each of its mobility modes: tele-op, waypoint navigation and convoy operations.

Soldiers from the Tennessee Army National Guard
1-181st Field Artillery Regiment were also on hand to train on and operate the AML.




The US Army is interested in acquiring two new autonomous platforms under a new initiative it’s calling the Common Autonomous Multi-Domain Launcher (CAML).
“CAML is an autonomous/optionally crewed, highly mobile, air transportable, cross domain fires launcher with the potential to augment or replace existing Army launchers,” the service said.

As for the smaller, CAML-M variant, the service is interested in using a Family of Medium Tactical Vehicle (FMTV) as the base to launch Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) Family of Munitions or the new Indirect Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) with AIM-9X interceptors.
For the CAML-H variant, the Army wants to integrate a launcher onto a M1075 Palletized Loading System tactical vehicle — or similar 15-ton class chassis — that can then fire the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile or the Patriot Advanced Capabilities Three (PAC-3) Missile Segment Enhancement interceptor. However, the service did not specify how many rounds each launcher should be able to hold.

“The CAML-M will be supported by an Autonomous Resupply Vehicle (ARV) capable of autonomously reloading pods/cannisters of missiles onto the CAML-M with minimal to no human intervention,” the service explained.
“The CAML-H variant will be an Autonomous Self Resupplying System capable of autonomously reloading cannisters of missiles onto the CAML-H with minimal to no human intervention,” the Army added.



1752765203073.png
 
So interesting concept, sort of a HIMARS/MML autonomous launcher. Does that autonomous launcher need to be a certain proximity to a human remote operator?

I noticed in the video that they show the C130 deploying a HIMARS and one of these remote launcher thingys. I have seen a few videos of the US and their Herc-ing in HIMARS to fire rockets and then scoot. I believe its part of the planned "island hopping/dominating" concept in the pacific Ocean if USA and China go gloves on and start swinging.
 
So interesting concept, sort of a HIMARS/MML autonomous launcher. Does that autonomous launcher need to be a certain proximity to a human remote operator?

Well, from this info I gather that they are looking at the vehicle and the "TEL-Turret" as two separate but related systems.

For the vehicle they are looking at Convoy Operations (follow the leader), Waypoint Navigation (autonomous travel between points) and Tele-Op (basic remote control - tethered or RC?). Those capabilities mirror the types of capabilities seen on the Rheinmetall PATH version of the little Argo 8x8. Over short distances the vehicle can be trusted to move from point A to point B. Or the operator can manoeuvre the vehicle from an offboard remote control pad using either a joystick or inputting waypoints. Or, as seen in the video, it can just play follow the leader.

A conventional HIMARS crew of 3, and that can be reduced to 2, would normally have 6 rounds at their disposal. If they have an AML in trail, playing follow the leader, then they will have 18 of the GMRLS type rounds. If they are launching the PrSMs then their loadout will increase from 2 to 6.

As for the traversing, elevating and firing, apparently that could all be done off board "from a hide" or, presumably, from the leader truck. Or from the C130?

During its time at YPG, the AML launched three RRPRs in a successive ripple fire mission. In all, six RRPRs were successfully fired from the AML in a demonstration of the launcher’s ability to maneuver under supervised autonomy from a hide location to a firing point, turn to an assigned heading and execute fire control commands from a remote gunner position.

Over the past week leading up to the initial live fire, the AML successfully demonstrated each of its mobility modes: tele-op, waypoint navigation and convoy operations.

Soldiers from the Tennessee Army National Guard
1-181st Field Artillery Regiment were also on hand to train on and operate the AML.


The other intriguing bit is the use of the use of autonomous vehicles to carry reloads and giving the firing vehicle the ability to reload itself.

...

Because this is also to be used for AIM-9X missiles l can see these being used on airfields where they could run out to designated firing positions then return to hardened shelters when exhausted to reload and return to a new firing position. All the while keeping the gunners under cover.

And if they are contemplating the AIM-9 then perhaps, like the NASAM MML system they could also manage AIM-120 AMRAAMs and ESSMs.
 
This may be the CAML-H version they are talking about

That's an excellent video that gives a great Coles Notes version of the US Army rocket program including its strengths and limitations.

There's an interesting issue that comes out of the CAML-M autonomous version shown here which is that you can load two side-by-side launcher pods inside a C-130. I always thought the fact that the HIMARS only had the one pod was based on that load configuration. The idea of pairing a HIMARS with a CAML-M is interesting because it gives the mission set three pods ready to fire. It does make me wonder why the HIMARS itself isn't reconfigured to a two pod unit using the same launcher assembly as the CAML-M.

I still debate the usefulness of autonomy. I think manpower savings at the expense of increased complexity is a false economy - especially when adding in the additional tasks the humans are required to do like ammunition handling and local security. The prior article about soldiers from the 1-181 FAR (an ARNG HIMARS battalion) makes it clear that these systems can be operated on the basis of using much less expensive part-time troops.

Interesting pronunciation of HIMARS throughout (HimMars rather than HighMars). It's a Lockheed Martin video - I guess they know - I don't think I can change myself to do that.

🍻
 
I was wondering about the side by side HyMARS as well. I can't believe that a crewed cab would be that much heavier and bulkier, especially if stripped of armour. For those 500 km shoot and scoot missions I doubt if the armour is a critical requirement. On the other hand if launching 122mm artillery rockets then armour would be a requirement I would think.

Re the automation

I see applications. I don't see autonomous convoys running from Dusseldorf to Donbas.

On the other hand short haul convoys/packets near the front with, for example, one crewed self-loading HIMARs in the lead and its autonomous resupply vehicle in trail, or as the video suggests a crewed, uncrewed firing pair. I like the idea of getting the crew offboard at the firing position, and the crew being able to reload either while sitting in the cab (armoured) or in a remote hide.

Also, based on what I see of autonomous trucks at mining sites then I could see a mobile autonomous air defence system.


....

Even if they automate the ammo handling, especially perhaps, the arty is going to need lots more mechanics and electricians. And spare parts to plug in.
 
Related


The future of artillery is a system that can do both offense and defense, the head of U.S. Army Europe and Africa said Wednesday—and the service believes it’s finally at a place to make that happen.

“So I do think that we're probably at the point where technology, industry and then, as importantly, how we are going to employ these? It's all coming together,” Donahue said.

“So specifically, what we want to develop is a common launcher, a common launcher that is both offensive- and defensive-capable,” Donahue said earlier during the conference. “We want a common fire-control system so that any nation can use that fire control system.”

It will also need to have an unmanned capability, he added.

“So if we look out for an air defense system or a long-range fires system, we want it to be one system, optionally manned,” Donahue said. “We want to be able to take munitions from any country and shoot through that.”

So not a system without crews but a system that can be operated without crews if the situation suggests that.

And one common system that can launch Surface to Surface and Surface to Air missiles from any country at any target using a common launcher and a common Fire Control System.

...

Again I think the Army is going to be looking to the Navy.

One ship with one Combat Information Centre and one Mk41 VLS with a complex array of ABMs, LRSAMs, MRSAMs, SRSAMs, TLAM and MST Tomahawks, Anti-Submarine ASROCs, JSMs, JAGMs and LRASMs etc.

Together with the Navy's Co-Operative Engagement Capability netting distributed launchers and control centers.

....

Is this the future of 4 (GS) ?
 
This article does a good job of laying out possibilities, requirements and limitations.

It also suggests why I think an autonomous Air Defence Battery is more likely to happen ahead of an autonomous Field Artillery Battery. The latter is likely to be more of a candidate for reduced/optional manning than total autonomy.


Considerations when implementing autonomous haulage in open cut mining​

Although autonomous vehicles have been under development for decades, their productive use in mining is relatively new. As the technology becomes more refined and accessible, it is now more commonplace for new mines, and those with sufficient remaining mine life to consider running an Autonomous Haulage System (AHS). Whilst their use has been accredited with improvements in safety, reductions in wear and increased utilization, there are AHS specific requirements which need to be considered in order to properly quantify any potential benefit an AHS fleet could deliver to an operation.

Additional Infrastructure Requirements​

On an elementary level, AHS trucks need to have three basic pieces of information to operate safely.

  1. Their current location
  2. The route to their destination
  3. The location of other equipment

To answer all the questions above and have a control and communication network, Wi-Fi or Long-Term Evolution (LTE) coverage must be established throughout the trucks operating environment. This network allows the trucks to be controlled from great distances. For example, there are operations in Australia which have control centres in major city’s servicing remote mines, thousands of kilometres away (Suncor Energy, 2018). (Canajan, Eh?)

In order to provide the first piece of information, the trucks need to be fitted with Global Positioning System (GPS) beacons. This is in addition to several other components like Lidar, Radar, vehicle controllers, and Wi-Fi. Although there are concepts around AHS dedicated trucks, current operating models are based on traditional manned machines which have been in service for many years. Therefore, in addition to the standard cost of each manned machine, they also need to be retrofitted to effectively “convert” them to AHS trucks.

The importance of accurate survey is highlighted by the need to provide the second piece of information. Routes and boundaries are set by the survey department. These are usually updated on a daily basis and then sent out to the trucks (through the site Wi-Fi network). Accurate survey accounts for the rapid rate at which the layout of a mining operation changes. Take, for example, a truck which on Monday is driving on a large stockpile and then dumping ore to build it northwards. In order for it to dump at that stockpile, a boundary had to be established by survey and then communicated to the truck. On Tuesday, the stockpile is closed as a dumping location and is reclaimed southwards, past the point of the previous tip head. On Wednesday the stockpile is re-opened as a dumping location. If the new tip head position is not re-surveyed, a truck could potentially drive straight off the stockpile because as far as it is aware, the tip head is still in the same position it was on Monday. This example demonstrates the need for high quality, frequently updated survey data to establish a safe working environment.

The final piece of information needed is the location of other equipment. This information is provided by retrofitting both heavy and light vehicles in the AHS operating area with GPS, network capability and emergency stops which effectively pause the movement of the AHS fleet at the touch of a button. It is very important that all these systems are reliable to establish a safe and efficient operating environment. Most AHS control systems will effectively halt operations when other equipment comes within a truck’s operating “bubble”. Inaccurate locations may cause unwarranted interference with haulage operations. Generally, if a heavy or light vehicle’s location is completely lost (loss of GPS or Wi-Fi signal) it will result in the trucks automatically pulling up until the location can be re-established.

Staff Training

At this point in time, there are no exclusive autonomous mining environments. Other equipment like dig units, graders and light vehicles still need to operate in a mine around AHS trucks. Their operators need to be trained in how to properly interact with AHS equipment. This takes on different forms depending on which piece of equipment is operating with the trucks. For example, a dig unit operator would need to learn how to use the network to set a load or stop point for the autonomous trucks in order to instruct the trucks when to reverse into position for loading and when to leave the loading point. They would also need to know how to position their bucket for an AHS truck as it can be used as a reference point by the truck for positioning correctly.

Light vehicle users would need to know how their behaviour affects the productivity of trucks. Depending on how the rules of the environment are set up, a light vehicle could hold up a truck by being parked in the opposite lane of an oncoming truck. A clear understanding by staff of the rules-based system which governs an AHS environment is needed for safe and productive mining.

Local Climatic Conditions

An operations communication network and equipment GPS are relied upon by the trucks to navigate the mine. However, in addition to this, the trucks are usually fitted with Radar and Lidar to detect obstacles and avoid collisions. The effectiveness of all these systems is impacted by the weather. Radar and Lidar, as hazard detection devices, can be quite sensitive to things like dust or snow.

Mine Design

Although improvements are always being made to the capabilities of AHS fleets, they currently require special consideration when designing infrastructure like pits and stockpiles. In general, this refers to working space design factors such as maximum gradients, minimum turning circles, and minimum road widths. If the working environment is not set up to allow for these requirements, there is a risk of un-necessarily triggering the autonomous trucks safety systems (Radar, Lidar, GPS Proximity) to stop the truck. These design factors are of particular importance when introducing AHS to an already producing operation. Pit designs may need to be reviewed and modified, impacting stripping ratios and ultimately costs.

Road Maintenance

This is somewhat related to road design in that the AHS system is unforgiving of poor construction and maintenance. Larger open pit operations tend not to have the level of accuracy commonly found in the civil construction industry. If this trend is carried forward when an AHS fleet is implemented it can result in frequent delays. Strict adherence to AHS specific design factors is needed by the pit development team.

Poor road conditions which result in incidents where rocks are dropped from trays can set off the Radar/Lidar emergency stop systems and interrupt production until someone is sent out to investigate and remove any obstruction. Had this same obstacle been present in a manned vehicle, the operator may have been able to drive around the obstacle and simply call for a clean-up.

Mine Planning

As mentioned, Mine Planning needs to account for AHS delays due to poor weather conditions, in which a manned fleet may have continued to operate. Understanding how localized conditions will affect the AHS trucks and to what degree, is usually initiated once the AHS trucks are on site. To this end, there is usually an implementation period for the technology to be established and understood and for staff to be trained. A common implementation method is to use a manned fleet in areas of the mine where ore is being sourced. This is usually kept separate to the AHS fleet in order to avoid delays in feeding the crusher and obtaining that important revenue stream. The AHS fleet will then be set up in a separate area of the mine where pre-stripping of waste is needed. This creates a pit-to-dump AHS only area, where all the fixed and mobile infrastructure required to run AHS trucks can be calibrated to the specific site. This will minimize the impact on the operation. It can also serve as a training facility, where staff can be introduced to and gain experience in the operation of an AHS fleet before it is rolled out, sitewide.

Once management has confidence in the operation of the AHS fleet, it can then be integrated into the main operation with manned trucks. The AHS trucks will usually maintain their assignment to waste runs until the stockpile and run of mine (ROM) areas have been properly set up for their use. Following this, the remaining manned trucks can be retrofitted, and the operation can exclusively run autonomous trucks.

It is the job of the Mine Planner to account for these initial requirements for segregation and then adjust the plan as unforeseen delays may occur. Data gathered from the implementation period, will also help to predict future performance and thus create more accurate mine development plans.

Conclusion​

Up to now, the implementation of AHS fleets in mining has been undertaken by large firms. This is mainly due to the experimental nature of the technology. Now that AHS is being rolled out on a wider basis, it is becoming accepted as a permanent part of a modern mining operation. Although the technology has been proven to deliver improvements in equipment utilization, safety, and mechanical wear, it is also important to carefully consider the potential for safety compromises due to poor environmental controls, or the negative impact on productivity due to inadvertent triggering of safety systems. In addition, the impact of design control factors on the economics of the operation should be considered.

 
And one common system that can launch Surface to Surface and Surface to Air missiles from any country at any target using a common launcher and a common Fire Control System.
I don't quite see a dual mission set - like with a pod loaded for surface to surface and one loaded surface to air with a common control centre like on a ship.

I do see a future for a common launch vehicle that can be retasked from a SS unit to an SA unit or vice versa

For me the difficulty lies in overtasking the control centre in monitoring and providing effects in both the surface and air target environments. Technology can only take you so far. If too much is on the plate, eventually you'll screw up somewhere.
Is this the future of 4 (GS) ?
Regardless, I think the more likely outcome is that 4 GS goes back to 4 AD and an RCHA fd regt will be assigned the surface to surface missile role.

🍻
 
I don't quite see a dual mission set - like with a pod loaded for surface to surface and one loaded surface to air with a common control centre like on a ship.

I agree with you.


I do see a future for a common launch vehicle that can be retasked from a SS unit to an SA unit or vice versa

And again.

For me the difficulty lies in overtasking the control centre in monitoring and providing effects in both the surface and air target environments. Technology can only take you so far. If too much is on the plate, eventually you'll screw up somewhere.

Regardless, I think the more likely outcome is that 4 GS goes back to 4 AD and an RCHA fd regt will be assigned the surface to surface missile role.

🍻

So perhaps a single Surface to Surface regiment and another AD regiment both equipped with the same trucks, TELs, resupply and FCS.

But, in the Surface to Surface case one battery tasked locally in the Anti-ship role, another in the Depth role with PrSMs and yet another Div Support with GMRLS?
 
So perhaps a single Surface to Surface regiment and another AD regiment both equipped with the same trucks, TELs, resupply and FCS.
Yes - albeit I'm not sure our procurement system of handling that. My cynicism is showing. One vehicle fleet capable of handling a variety of missiles would make sense but I doubt that its a practical solution for us. That needs work in the design stage and I think we're better off purchasing two distinct off-the-shelf systems.
But, in the Surface to Surface case one battery tasked locally in the Anti-ship role, another in the Depth role with PrSMs and yet another Div Support with GMRLS?
Not really. My guess would be a field regiment that responds to both div support and depth. I've become a believer in anti-ship as a role for a specialized anti-access/area denial ARes arty regiment on each coast but that, and an ARes AD regiment to protect the RCN harbour facilities, are undoubtedly pipe dreams of mine well beyond anything that the CAF would consider important. ;)

🍻
 
Yes - albeit I'm not sure our procurement system of handling that. My cynicism is showing. One vehicle fleet capable of handling a variety of missiles would make sense but I doubt that its a practical solution for us. That needs work in the design stage and I think we're better off purchasing two distinct off-the-shelf systems.

Not really. My guess would be a field regiment that responds to both div support and depth. I've become a believer in anti-ship as a role for a specialized anti-access/area denial ARes arty regiment on each coast but that, and an ARes AD regiment to protect the RCN harbour facilities, are undoubtedly pipe dreams of mine well beyond anything that the CAF would consider important. ;)

🍻

My pipe dream involves recreating the Ordnance Department and have it purchase munitions separate from launchers.

Rather than the RCAF, the RCN and the RRCA all buying Sidewinders, AMRAAMs and ESSMs separately, allocated to their separate capital projects (RCDs, CDCs, F35s, P8, GBAD) buy the munitions centrally and issue them to the services. Same same with Tomahawks, SM3s and SM6s, the MLRS family, and even bullets, bombs and shells.

If the accountants get twitchy tell them that surplus purchases will be sold on the open market to approved buyers as per the NDA Act Part I Section 11

Materiel​

Delivery of materiel for sale or disposal

11 The Governor in Council may authorize the Minister to deliver to any department or agency of the Government of Canada, for sale or disposal to any countries or international welfare organizations and on any terms that the Governor in Council may determine, any materiel that has not been declared surplus and is not immediately required for the use of the Canadian Forces or for any other purpose under this Act.

  • R.S., 1985, c. N-5, s. 11
  • 1998, c. 35, s. 3

PS - re the work in the design stage, I would be counting on our Yankee cousins to get that sorted out for us in the near future, if I am understanding these articles correctly.
 
Last edited:
My pipe dream involves recreating the Ordnance Department and have it purchase munitions separate from launchers.

Rather than the RCAF, the RCN and the RRCA all buying Sidewinders, AMRAAMs and ESSMs separately, allocated to their separate capital projects (RCDs, CDCs, F35s, P8, GBAD) buy the munitions centrally and issue them to the services. Same same with Tomahawks, SM3s and SM6s, the MLRS family, and even bullets, bombs and shells.

If the accountants get twitchy tell them that surplus purchases will be sold on the open market to approved buyers as per the NDA Act Part I Section 11
Actually it's only the initial buy of ammunition that comes with the capital project. After that, ammunition, I believe, is purchased centrally through the Munitions Supply Program which is funded out of the annual National Procurement budget. @dapaterson let me know if that's right or wrong.

Has this been posted already?

I don't think that there has been any formal announcement on this. The LRPF project is certainly proceeding but I can't say where it's at other than its in its final stages.

🍻
 
Correct. Projects acquire the initial capability including required ammunition.

Lifecycle ammunition is acquired through National Procurement.
 
Actually it's only the initial buy of ammunition that comes with the capital project. After that, ammunition, I believe, is purchased centrally through the Munitions Supply Program which is funded out of the annual National Procurement budget. @dapaterson let me know if that's right or wrong.


I don't think that there has been any formal announcement on this. The LRPF project is certainly proceeding but I can't say where it's at other than its in its final stages.

🍻

Projects follow this process:

Identification
Options Analysis
Definition
Implementation

Major contracts will generally be let as a project exits Def to enter Imp.

Projects may have multiple phases of Def and Imp, and often will have infra components as well, which may include second order requirements as well.
 
Back
Top