Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture
May 30, 2022 27 tweets 10 min read Read on X
M270 MLRS or M142 HIMARS?

Which of the two will Ukraine receive?
And how will this change the war?

A missile artillery thread 🧵

1/n Image
In my last thread I explained the differences between the:

🇺🇸 M270 MLRS and M142 HIMARS
🇷🇺 BM-27 Uragan and BM-30 Smerch

and looked at what missiles are available for the M270 and M142. I suggest you read it before continuing with this thread.

2/n
The US has two multiple launch rocket systems:

M270 MLRS and M142 HIMARS

Both have a crew of three, both fire the same missiles, both do not need a Fire Direction Center to compute their missions.

3/n Image
The M142 HIMARS exists in only one version. No updates so far - this version is called M142A0.

The M270 MLRS exists in three versions:
• M270A0
• M270A1
• M270A2

You can distinguish the A1/A2 from the earlier A0 by the GPS antenna on the launcher (red arrow).
4/n Image
The M270A0 can only fire the M26 series, M28 series training rockets, and M39 rocket (photo: a M28 launch). As of 2022 no country fields the M270A0.

The M270A1 can fire all current missiles, but its processing power is too slow to fire the future PrSM missile.

5/n Image
Therefore Lockheed Martin is currently overhauling and upgrading 160 stored M270A0 with new engines, transmissions, launcher-loader modules, and the new Common Fire Control System (CFCS) - this version will be known as M270A2.

These 160 new M270A2 will equip the currently

6/n
active ten US Army and US Army National Guard artillery battalions, which all use the M270A1.

When these 160 M270A2 have been delivered Lockheed will begin to overhaul and upgrade the existing fleet of 225 M270A1 launchers to the new M270A2 standard.

7/n Image
Once the overhauled M270A1 leave the Lockheed facilities as M270A2 the Army will raise new artillery battalions and increase the number of launchers per battalion.

All this means that Ukraine can only get either M142 or M270A1 launchers, because the M270A0 can't fire the

8/n
GPS guided GMLRS missiles in the US inventory, while the M270A2 is the pinnacle of US military tech and its CFCS is top secret.

This leaves the M270A1 as only possible M270 variant, and luckily Lockheed is right now delivering the first M270A2 to US Army artillery units,

9/n Image
which are concurrently retiring their M270A1.

As for the M142: more than 540 have been produced so far and the US Army and Marine inventory is around 450 systems, with approximately 335 in active units.

In short: the US could donate a lot of either system to Ukraine,

10/n Image
as of both 100+ are available and as both systems can be replaced by the US defense industry.

The main difference between the two systems is that the M142 carries only one missile pod. As pods contain the same 6x missiles (either 6x M30A1, 6x M31, or 6x M31A1) this somewhat
11/n
limits a artillery commander's options... unless he has two M142 loaded with different missiles.

The M270A1 carries two pods and so can fire unitary warheads (M31/M31A1) and alternative warhead (M30A1) rockets in the same fire mission.

Photo: a M31 launch in Iraq
12/n Image
Both systems can fire a LOT more missions per hour than russian systems.

As mentioned in my earlier tweet it takes 20+ minutes to reload the Uragan (photo) and 40+ minutes to reload the Smerch.

M142 and M270A1 reload time: 5 minutes.
13/n Image
Then the russians have to measure and set up their firing positions, plot a fire mission with their outdated maps, sight their launchers optically (photo) - this and their slow reloading time mean that the russians can fire one volley per hour at best...

14/n Image
The M142 and M270A1 need 1 minute to stop, set up and fire their missiles:

drone spots a russian target - sends GPS coordinates to the M142 - gunner enters GPS coordinates into the UFCS - launches missiles - moves on.

A M142 or M270A1 can fire 5-6 volleys per hour (!).
15/n Image
Not only are M142 and M270A1 faster to reload, quicker to fire, and massively more accurate than russian rocket launchers - their missiles also fly further than russian missiles.

Officially GMLRS missiles have a range of 70 km... I can tell you that this is not true.
16/n
Just how much further their real range is I cannot disclose, but the russians are about to make painful discoveries soon.

We now know which launchers and missiles Ukraine will receive... now let's look at how these missiles will deliver a lot of hurt to the russians.

17/n Image
Let's look first at the Kherson front.

I used @Nrg8000's brilliant maps for these:
• in the 1st image I added two blue circles with the range of M777 howitzers with M795 projectiles
• in the 2nd image I added a yellow circle with the "official" range of a M31A1 rocket

18/n ImageImage
Just one M142 or M270A1 can not only fire at almost every russian position in Kherson Oblast, it can also hit the choke points of russia's two supply lines:
• the Antonovskiy Bridge near Kherson and
• the Kakhovka Dam near Nova Kakhovka

19/n
Send up a drone:
• find russian supply point - hit it with a M30A1
• find a russian command post - hit it with a M31A1
• find a russian battery - give it a taste of both
• find russian infantry - one M30A1 will hit them with 160,000 scorching hot, 3 Mach fast shrapnels

20/n
Now let's look at Kharkiv.

In blue the range of a M777 with M795 projectile, and in green the range of a self-propelled CAESAR howitzer.

In yellow the "official" range of where a M270A1 or M142 can make the russian's life hell.
21/n ImageImage
The entire russian supply line using the railway from Vovchansk to Kupiansk is in range. The russian supply point at Kupiansk, which supplies the russian salient at Izyum is in range.

And there is no need to worry about counter battery fire: M142 and M270A1 fire their
22/n
missiles so quickly that whatever russia fires in return will hit long after both vehicles are gone.

The M142 crew doesn't even have to get out of their vehicle to reload. The only risk to them are drones. So both vehicles need air defense close by.

23/n Image
And now we look at the Donbas front. Two M777 in blue and one CAESAR in green... and compare this to what one M270A1 or M142 can cover.

A handful of M142 moving constantly around in the Donbas area, stopping only to fire or reload can hit attacking russian troops anywhere.

24/n ImageImage
If a russian battery or air defense system is spotted deep behind russian lines - drive closer to the frontline, fire the missiles, move back out of russian artillery range.

Then reload and repeat.
25/n Image
M270A1 and/or M142 are definitely going to change the dynamics of this war.

Every russian attack will get smited, every russian supply point will get destroyed. And we already know that russia can't move further than 80-90 km supply points.

26/n Image
But Ukraine needs a lot of M270A1 or M142. As @nicholadrummond already said: 48x launchers is the minimum. Plus lots and lots of missiles, and drones to spot every russian position.

Send this to Ukraine NOW and we can wrap this war up before Ukraine's independence day.

27/n Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Thomas C. Theiner

Thomas C. Theiner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @noclador

Apr 28
How to do mobilization for war in the perfect way: the @USArmy in #WWII:

When Germany invaded Poland the US Army consisted of just 6× divisions (1st ID, 2nd ID, 3rd ID, 1st CAV, Hawaiian Division, Philippine Division).
1/12 Image
In October 1939 the Army added the 5th ID and 6th ID. Afterwards the US Army fielded 8× divisions.

After the Germans invaded France with 141× divisions, the US Army activated another 4× infantry (4th, 7th, 8th, 9th) and 2× armored (1st, 2nd) divisions.

Total: 14× divisions.
2/n Image
In fall of 1940 the National Guard was federalized. This added 10× infantry divisions (27th, 30th, 31st, 32nd, 35th, 36th, 37th, 41st, 44th, 45th).

In spring 1941 a further 8× National Guard divisions were federalized (26th, 28th, 29th, 33rd, 34th, 38th, 40th, 43rd).
3/n
Read 12 tweets
Apr 25
Today Germans found out that raising and stationing a Panzerbrigade in Lithuania will cost up to €11 billion...

Of course, because if you devastate your military for 30 years and create gaps in personnel, materiel, etc. it costs MORE to rebuild than it would have cost to
1/5 Image
maintain your military. Germany between 1989 and 2024 reduced its battalions (active and reserve) by the following %:

CBRN Defense -63,64%
Artillery -92,68%
Reconnaissance -45,45%
Paratroopers -66,67%
Signals -66,67%
Air Defense -100,00%
Gebirgsjäger -25,00%
Panzer -91,76%
2/5
Army Aviation -70,00%
Light Infantry -96,98%
Logistics -83,70%
Panzergrenadier -82,81%
Engineers -83,33%
Medical -84,00%
Bridging -92,86%

Total: -87,47%

Disbanded the units, paid to have the equipment and materiel scrapped, sold of the bases, and retired the people with the
3/5 Image
Read 5 tweets
Apr 19
The air defense of a large country is difficult.

People have forgotten the insane density (and cost) of NATO's Cold War SAM belts.

In Germany alone the HAWK belt consisted of (from North to South):
• 24× German
• 12× Dutch
• 8x Belgian
• 35× US Army
• 12× German

1/8 Image
HAWK sites, each of which was filled with radars and missile launchers. (Photo: the Dutch HAWK site on Velmerstot in Germany).

Between the SAM belt and the border mobile radars, and short range air defense systems like Gepard, Roland, Chaparral, VADS, etc. as well as mobile
2/8 Image
Javelin and Stinger teams covered the units operating there.

And behind the HAWK SAM (Surface to Air Missile) belt followed a second SAM belt, with long range NIKE HERCULES missiles, which carried nuclear warheads. All this was backed up by German, US Air Force, British
3/8 Image
Read 8 tweets
Apr 2
On April Fool's Day the head of the German Navy's Naval Aviation the #Marineflieger joked that the Marineflieger would finally get fighter jets again...

This should NOT be a joke.
This should be a high priority investment for the Bundeswehr.

A thread about 🇩🇪🇩🇰🇸🇪🇫🇮🇵🇱🇬🇧:
1/17 Image
During the Cold War the West German & Danish navies' tasks were to:
• prevent the Soviet Baltic, East German & Polish fleets from transiting the Skagerrak
• prevent Warsaw Pact amphibious landings on the Danish isles

For this the German forces in Schleswig Holstein & the
2/17
Danish military were assigned to NATO's Allied Forces Baltic Approaches (BALTAP) Command.

To defend the sea approaches BALTAP had 30 submarines, 56 missile boats, some 60 mine layers, and land based Harpoon missile batteries (which were transferred to Ukraine in June 2022).
3/17 Image
Read 17 tweets
Mar 31
The Soviet Union was losing the war against Germany.

Only the 🇺🇸 US industry saved the Soviets.

In 1941 in seven months of war in the East the Wehrmacht suffered 285,400 irrecoverable losses vs. 3,137,673 irrecoverable Soviet losses. A ratio of 1 to 11 (!).
1/6 Image
In the 12 months of 1942 the Wehrmacht suffered 500,700 irrecoverable losses vs. 3,258,216 Soviet irrecoverable losses. A ratio of 1 to 6.5.

BUT from 1941 to 1942 Soviet average monthly losses decreased by 176,700 troops... because US Lend/Lease materiel began to arrive.
2/6 Image
Especially helpful were 312,600 American trucks (which incl. about 187,900 Studebaker US6). This allowed the Soviets to motorize their rifle divisions and vastly improved Red Army logistics. (The Soviet Union only produced 150,000 trucks during the entire war).
3/6 Image
Read 6 tweets
Mar 31
About the loss of British combat power:

During the Cold War the British Army was the smallest of the four big (🇬🇧🇫🇷🇩🇪🇮🇹) European NATO armies.

The British Army fielded 13 brigades (+ the Royal Marines' Commando brigade), while Germany fielded 38 and Italy 25 brigades.
1/6 Image
France fielded 12 divisions, which each had the strength of 2× standard NATO brigades.

But no one complained, because at the time the Royal Air Force was the biggest air force on the continent with some 800+ fighters & bombers. Only France fielded a comparable air force.
2/6 Image
And the Royal Navy was the second biggest navy in NATO with more ocean-going ships than the French, German and Italian navies combined (!).

But after the Cold War, and especially under the Tory governments since 2010, the British Armed Forces have been wrecked.
3/6 Image
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(