Canada seeks to buy Long Range Precision Rockets (probably US MLRS or HIMARS)

[Furniture]

1:50, they contain the fire control electronics. They're integral to the launcher not the pod.

It seems like a product of the GWOT (which it is), so that makes sense. Back in the GWOT, we weren't deleting grid squares with rockets, we wanted precision fires on demand.

In the current context, I see why they are pivoting to more firepower in the same footprint.

 

[FJAG]

1:50, they contain the fire control electronics. They're integral to the launcher not the pod.

That still looks like wasted space. That said I'm not sure if one could up the load on the truck and still have functional crane/loader/launcher frame that could handle two pods and fit in a C-130 . . . or if its even worth the squeeze for doubling the load considering its manner of tactical employment.

 

[FJAG]

It seems like a product of the GWOT (which it is), so that makes sense. Back in the GWOT, we weren't deleting grid squares with rockets, we wanted precision fires on demand.

In the current context, I see why they are pivoting to more firepower in the same footprint.

The trucks and launchers are relatively cheap compared to the ammo. I think if I had the choice of a HIMARS with double the pod capacity or two launchers with one pod each, I think I'd opt for creating regiments with more launchers or more regiments. I like redundancy.

 

[markppcli]

It seems like a product of the GWOT (which it is), so that makes sense. Back in the GWOT, we weren't deleting grid squares with rockets, we wanted precision fires on demand.

In the current context, I see why they are pivoting to more firepower in the same footprint.

Not really - its development is a direct result of Gulf War 1 where M270s were to slow to be in the first wave of troops deployed. The prototypes were out in 1996, ATACMs in 1998, delivery was in 2005 but in no way was it built for the GWOT.

That still looks like wasted space. That said I'm not sure if one could up the load on the truck and still have functional crane/loader/launcher frame that could handle two pods and fit in a C-130 . . . or if its even worth the squeeze for doubling the load considering its manner of tactical employment.

Its going to need fire control systems somewhere, either in the cab, or on the outside. Needs to be reasonablly accessible for repair as well.

 

[Furniture]

Not really - its development is a direct result of Gulf War 1 where M270s were to slow to be in the first wave of troops deployed. The prototypes were out in 1996, ATACMs in 1998, delivery was in 2005 but in no way was it built for the GWOT.

Fair... not GWOT, but the same mentality. Precision over volume.

There is no world in which the pod needed sponsons for FCS, in which the FCS couldn't have been mounted in the cab. The single pod was entirely a function of the 90s-20s obsession with precision over volume.