Multiple Launch Rocket System: Hope For The Future
AUTHOR Major James F. Honeycutt, USMC
CSC 1990
SUBJECT AREA Artillery
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM: HOPE FOR THE FUTURE
THESIS: The USMC must acquire an artillery system that is available to the
MAGTF commander 24 hours a day under any weather condition with the
capability of causing confusion and destruction in the enemy's rear which will
enable the commander to influence the battle.
There is world wide pressure to reduce both the United States' and Russia's
military forces. Due to this pressure, the U. S. Congress and the American
citizens have decided that the military budget should be reduced and the savings
be invested in domestic programs and in reducing the national debt. The U. S.
government must "get smart" in their future purchases bu buying weapon
systems that are flexible, require less maintenance and manpower, and provides
more "bang for the dollar". Today's USMC artillery consists of old technology,
limited range, and heavy manpower and maintenance requirements. A weapon
system that will give the commander the capability to influence the battle is the
Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS).
The first part of the paper introduces to the reader the increased mission,
equipment, ammunition, maneuverability, and employment capabilities of the
MLRS as compared to other artillery systems. Next, the reader will then get an
insight of the proposed maintenance considerations that will be used by the test
bed battery that was aquired from the U. S. Army. After this, the MLRS
organization concepts are discussed concerning manpower requirements and
responsibilities. The next subject is the training of the critical MOSs that is
required to operate the new system and the follow-up training that will keep the
MLRS crews combat ready (field training). The final subject is the comparison
of cost of present day artillery to the MLRS. This comparsion is done as an
estimated annual cost analysis by comparing the replenishment (class
IX),depot, ammunition, and crew cost by MCLB Albany.
The decision makers need to look more to future benefits rather than what
will be good today. The MLRS is the hope for the future and can be an artillery
system that gives the commander an edge on the battlefield while saving money
on manpower requirements and sustainment costs.
MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM:
HOPE FOR THE FUTURE
THESIS STATEMENT. The USMC must acquire an artillery system that is
available to the MAGTF commander 24 hours a day under any weather condition
with the capability of causing confusion and destruction in the enemy's rear
which will enable the commander to influence the battle.
I. MLRS capabilities
A. Mission
B. Principle equipment
C. Ammunition
D. Maneuverability
E. Employment
II. MLRS Maintenance considerations
III.MLRS organization
A. Manpower
B. Light weight
IV. Training requirements
V. Cost comparison
MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM:
HOPE FOR THE FUTURE
INTRODUCTION.
The world has undergone many significant changes during 1989.
Russia has demonstrated peaceful intentions while Eastern Block
countries are forming democratic governments. There is world wide
pressure to reduce both the United States' and Russia's military forces.
Due to this pressure the U. S. Congress and the American citizens have
decided that the military budget should be reduced and the savings be
invested in domestic programs and in reducing the national debt. The U.
S. government must "get smart" in their future purchases of weapon
systems by buying systems that are flexible, require less maintenance
and manpower, and providing more "bang for the dollar". World peace
will require the U. S. to use our money more wisely in aquiring weapon
systems that will give the U. S. Military the needed fire power to protect
United States interest during these changing times.
Manpower reductions within the military are the easist ways to save
money for the U. S. government. There has been a lot of discussion that
the strong presence of the U. S. military in Europe and Korea is no
longer needed to keep the peace. If such reductions occur, they will not
only affect the U. S. Army, but will cause reductions in the U. S.
Airforce, Navy, and Marine Corps as well. When the decision is made to
reduce the military, both the government and the military must work
together to maintain a strong yet streamlined and efficient force.
To balance these manpower reductions, weapon systems must be
developed that will require less manpower to operate and maintain.
The U. S. policy makers should look towards the future for the long term
effects rather than trying to make a decision that would be great today
but would spell danger tomorrow. They should get rid of systems with
outdated technology and heavy manpower requirements and buy
systems that will pay for themselves in increased capabilities and
manpower reductions.
One of the most expensive weapon systems in manpower and
maintenance is the Marine Corps' general support artillery. The M110A2
(8 "How SP) and the M109A3 (155MM SP) have high manpower
requirements in operating and maintaining the weapon systems. The
systems are old and their firepower is limited in range and destruction.
The Marine Corps has already taken action to solve this problem by
reducing its GS artillery by phasing out the M110A2. This saves money
but takes away from the force commander an important asset and
capability. General support artillery is the force commander's own
personal weapon. The USMC must acquire an artillery system that is
available to the MAGTF commander 24 hours a day under any weather
condition, with the capability of causing confusion and destruction in
the enemy's rear which will enable the commander to reach out and
influence the battle.
The possible replacement for both the M110A2 and the M109A3 is the
Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS). What are its capabillities,
maintenance requirements, organization, training requirements, and its
cost comparison to other artillery systems?
MLRS CAPABILITIES.
The Multiple Launch Rocket System has increased mission,
equipment, ammunition, maneuverability, and employment capabilities
as compared to other artillery systems.
MISSION.
The mission capabilities of the MLRS is much greater than present
day artillery. The following is the enhanced mission capabilities of the
MLRS:
- Ability to deliver large volume of firepower within a very short
period of time against critical targets
- The capability of destroying deep targets of 30K plus
- All-weather, indirect area-fire artillery system
-- Degraded battlefield conditions
-- NBC environment
- Supplement cannon artillery available to the GCE or MAGTF
commander
- Flexibility of attacking many different types of targets such as
indirect fire weapons, air defense,and light armour and
personnel targets
- Fire and forget mode 1
MLRS, because of its potential range and lethality, can perform missions
normally assigned to close air support (CAS).
PRINCIPLE EQUIPMENT.
At this point, it is important to understand the description of the
principal equipment items associated with the MLRS.
- The self-propelled loader launcher (SPLL) is the common name for
the Armored Vehicle Mounted Rocket Launcher M270. The M270 is a
highly mobile tracked vehicle consisting of the carrier, M993, which is
a derivative of the Bradly fighting vehicle. The M993 is a lightly
armored weapons platform. It has the capability of protecting the three
man crew from small-arms fire. The cab is protected from NBC and
rocket exhaust fumes with an MA3A1 filter system and a overpressure
ventilation system. The M269 Launcher, Rocket is lightly armored and
mounted on the M993. The M269 is the work horse in firing the rockets.
It aligns, holds, and protects the 12 rockets and all equipment necessary
to hoist, load/unload, aim, and fire the rockets (see figure 1.). 2
Click here to view image
- Located onboard the SPLL is the Fire Control System (FCS). This
system provides communications processing, ballistic computation,
weapon loading, position location, and the ability to control and fire up
to 12 rockets singularly or in a preprogrammed ripple sequence. The
FCS has the cabality to fire at 12 different targets wit1hin +/- 2000
meters northing and easting for any single tire mission. A complete
fire mission cycle of receipt of a fire mission, firing of the rockets, and
sending the launcher fire report requires four minutes not counting
travel time from its hiding location. 3
- The ammunition vehicle that will support the SPLL is the Dragon
Wagon. It is a ten-ton truck with excellent mobility characteristics and
an onboard crane that is used to load or off-load the launch
pod/container (LP/C). The Dragon Wagon is able to carry eight LP/Cs
with a trailer. 4
- The system that is used external to the SPLL but is extremely
important for C3 of the MLRS battery and its platoons is the Fire
Direction System (FDS). The FDS consists of a Battery Computer Unit
(BCU), COMSEC equipment, and radio communication devices; it is
mounted on a High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV).
The BCU is the brains for the battery and platoon commander. This fire
direction computer communicates digitally in the secure mode with a
variety of formatted and free text messages. It has the ability during a
fire mission to select a SPLL to fire, sends its fire order, automatically
updates its ammunition status, and informs higher headquarters of this
information as it happens. Important capabilities of the battery FDS
include the following:
-- Communicate on two channels by radio or wire
-- Perform target analysis by selecting the number of rockets to fire,
seqmenting targets, and establishing multiple aim points
-- Manually perform downrange mask checks
-- Store five downrange masks
-- Store two sets of meteorological data
-- Store six airspace coordination areas (ACA)
-- Store map modification data
-- Store four fire plans
Additionally the battery FDS can store the following:
--81 targets
--10 survey control points
--18 platoon center locations for up to 3 operational areas
--10 ammunition reload points
--45 firing points
--10 rendezvous points
--10 fire support coordinating measures
--Ammunition and firing status for 18 launchers
This type of C3 capabilities eliminates some of the fog of battle for the
roce commander.
AMMUNITION.
The next type of increased capability is the MLRS ammunition. There
are three munitions that are already developed; four more warheads are
being developed now. The three developed munitions are Rocket Pod
298MM: M26 antimaterial/antipersonnel, Rocket Pod 298MM: AT2
antitank mines, and Rocket Pod 298MM: Practice-M28. The four future
munitions are Rocket Pod 298MM: XM135 Binary Chemical Warhead
(BCW), Rocket Pod 298MM: XM(classification pending) Terminally Guided
Warhead (TGW), Rocket Pod 298MM: XM29 Sense and Destroy Armor
(SADARM) and M74: Army Tactical Missle System (TACMS). 6
- The first rocket pod munition is the M26. This rocket pod is
considered the basic munition that is currently being used. The rocket
warhead contains 644, M77 antimaterial/antipersonnel munitions. One
M26 warhead equals to seven rounds of 155mm or four rounds of 8" tube
artillery. The M77 is a duel purpose grenade that has a steel
fragmentation case for personnel and a shaped charge on impact for
light material and harder targets. The M26 has a devasting affect on
artillery, anti-air, C3, and personnel. 7 It is a very versatile munition
that will give the commander the edge on the battlefield (see figure 2.).
Click here to view image
- The AT2 antitank mine is the second munition that has been
developed by the Federal Republic of Germany. It is stabilized in free.
fall by a parachute that enables it to have a soft landing. After ground
impact, a thin wire deploys to trigger the mine when a vehicle makes
contact. Its capabilites are to destroy tracked and untracked vehicles,
area denial, and anti-personnel. This munition is not intended for
United States use (see figure 3.). 8
Click here to view image
- The final developed munition is the Practice-M28. It has the same
characterists as the M26, except it has a warhead with a spotting charge.
This round is cheaper and allows live firing in impact areas where the
range must be clear of unexploded munitions so personnel can safely
enter the area. 9
- A newly developed munition is the XM135 Binary Chemical
Capability (BCM). It is a safe weapon until flight when the chemicals
mix to form a deadly nerve agent for dispersal over the target. Its
mission is to provide a rapid tetaliatory chemical warfare capability
against enemyformations. This would cause high enemy casualties,
force enemy troops to mask and don protective gear, and restrict
themselves to protective structures. This weapon is used only when the
enemy has already used chemical weapons (see figure 4.) 10
Click here to view image
- Another munition in development is the Terminally Guided Warhead
(TGW). This major advancement of munitions is to have the capability to
detect, track and attack armored vehicles. Its mission is to defeat
medium to hard armored targets. TGW's operational capabilities allow
target engagement well beyond the FLOT, fire and forget, and fire
missions in any type of environment. This munition will revolutionize
the battlefield (see figure 5.). 11
Click here to view image
- The XM29 Sense and Destroy Armor (SADARM) is a new munition
development that has the capability of its munitions consisting of
sensing devices and lethal mechanisms for destruction of enemy
armored vehicles and equipment. SADARM mission is counterbattery,
closed fire support, suppression of enemy anti-air, and interdiction. Its
best effects on targets are self-propelled howitzers, armored personnel
carriers, and other lightlly armored combat vehicles. It has a fire and
forget capability. It is a weapon that would balance out the odds against
a superior mechanized and a artillery heavy force (see figure 6.). 12
Click here to view image
- The final developmental munition is the Army Tactical Missile
System (TACMS) M74. This munition has DPICM, is much larger than the
standard rocket pod and has a range capability of 100+ kilometers. It is
developed for targets at operational depths, such as second echelon
maneuver units, air defense units, C3, surface-to-surface missile units,
and forward area refueling and resupply points (FARRP'S). 13 With the
M74's deep target and all weather capability, the MAGTF commander has
the ability to influence the battle.
MANEUVERABILITY.
The MLRS has definite advantages in maneuverability over the M110 and
M1O9 Howitzers. It is lighter than either howitzer; the MLRS weighs 42,750
pounds (less crew, ammunition, and fuel) or 54,600 pounds (fully combat
loaded) while the M109 weighs 55,000 pounds and the M110 weighs 62,500
pounds. The MLRS takes up less square feet of ship space of 218' verses 366'
and 364' for the howitzers. The lighter and more compact MLRS enables it
to be loaded on C-141 alrcraft, compatible with all landing craft, and a
space saver on board amphibious ships. 14 A strong performance of the
MLRS is its 40 mph speed, a range of 300 miles, and the ability to climb a
60% slope. Some what of a weakness is its inability to move thorough the
surf (40" fording capability). The M11OA2 capabilities are far less in every
catagory except in its 42" fording capability. 15
EMPLOYMENT.
The employment of the MLRS battery is designed to give the force
commander flexible and responsive long range lethal fires and the ability
to keep his MLRSs survivable in a heavy threat environment. The battery
headquarters should be located out of range of Threat artillery - about 10 to
20 kilometers from the FLOT. The battery commander will place his
platoons 5 to 15 kilometers from the FLOT in independent areas
approximately 3 by 3 square kilometers, separate the platoon from 5 to 20
kilometers, and keep his headquarters up to 20 kilometers from his
platoons. This system enables the battery commander to spread out his
platoon for survivability while at the same time giving the force
commander the needed weapon system 24 hour a day and under any weather
conditions (see figure 7.). 16
Click here to view image
The MLRS platoons are assigned areas (3 by 3 kilometers) by the
battery commander while the platoon commander assigns firing
positions, hide positions, and resupply points inside this area. A platoon
commander may direct a firing SPLL to move to a firing position, complete
the firing mission, and then move to either another firing position, hiding
position or resupply point. The SPLL is designed to rapidly occupy a firing
position, deliver lethal fire, and then rapidly move to avoid counterfire. In
selecting a firing position, it should be in an open area with as little
masking as possible, near a trail or road to allow mobility, and away from
other units due to its firing signature and blast effect. The hide positions
are recommended to be two to four hundred meters from the each firing
position with natural concealment, if possible. The resupply point is where
the platoon SPLLs receive their ammunition, fuel, water, and food. The
resupply is coordinated by the battery commander by sending supplies to
the platoon commander to be distributed or by establishing a supply point
in the platoon area of operation. This system of employment always
enables the platoon commander to have a SPLL ready for fire even with a
down SPLL or a resting crew (see figure 8.). 17
Click here to view image
An important characteristic of a MLRS platoon is that it can get by with
one survey control point (SCP) in its area of operation. This is possible,
because each SPLL has a stabilization reference package/position
determining system (SRP/PDS). This system maintains an accuracy of 4/10
of 1% for every 1000 meters of travel which is an error of four meters per
kilometer. This enables the SPLL the flexibility of being reoriented only
after traveling six to eight kilometers. The reorientation of the SPLL to a
SCP takes 30 seconds and the realignment of the SRP to true north can be
accomplished within four minutes. With this capability of the MLRS
platoon, the platoon is able to have a larger area of operation for
survivability, be more responsive to the force commander, and save
manpower and time as compared to the present system of having each
battery position surveyed before firing. 18
MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS.
The USMC has aquired from the U. S. Army 11 SPLLs for testing and
evaluation. The USMC maintenance considerations for the SPLLs must be
addressed. The USMC maintenance considerations are concepts that will
probably change as experience and expertise are obtained. Their present
maintenance concepts are to devide the Launcher Rocket, Armored Vehicle
Mounted, M270 into two sub-systems. The two sub-systems are the Tracked
Vehicle, M993 (Bradly fighting vehicle) and the Launcher, Rocker, M269
which is mounted on the M993. 19
The maintenance for the Tracked Vehicle, M993, in first through fourth
echelon, will be done at the battery level. This is accomplished by the
only school trained MLRS mechanics (MOS 2143) which will be located in
the battery. These mechanics viii have the required tools to do the
necessary repairs up to fourth echelon. Since there is such a limited
number of vehicles, it will not be cost efficent to train CSS personnel, but
at times, their facilities made be used. Fifth echelon maintenance will be
done at Redriver Arsenal, an Army depot. If the Marine Corps decide to
purchase the MLRS, the maintenance procedures will mirror our present
system of first, second, and third echelon at organization, fourth echelon at
CSS, and fifth echelon at depot. The Marine Corps MLRSs will have the same
priority as any using Army unit in respect to repair parts. 20
The maintenance of the Launcher, Rocket, M269 will only be carried out
in first, second, and limited third echelon by the Marine battery. This is
due to the very high level of skill required to repair the system and the
tools that would be required. To keep the system repairs simple, a DX
method will be used by turning in an inoperative line replacable serial
(LRS) or a black box and receive a new one. The Marine Corps is planning
on a "repair and return" system to decrease the down-time of the system.
The repair of the LRS will be done at Army depot and priority of repairs
will be the same between the Army and Marines. The other end items in the
battery are already in the Marine Corps inventory and will go though the
normal maintenance that is already established for their particular
requirements. 21
MLRS ORGANIZATION.
The Marine Corps' proposed organization of the MLRS is quite different
from the Army's. The Army's organization is designed for a high intensity
vary while the Marine's is more flexible and is designed for any type of
conflict, low or high intensity war. This plan is based on having one
battery per I MEF and II MEF, while higher headquarters for each battery
will be at 11th Marines and 10th Marines respectfully. Four more batteries
will be formed in the reserves (14th Marine) with a battalion headquarters
for each two batteries. The four batteries in the reserves will augument the
I MEF and II MEF during the time of war or when the nation needs to
protect its interest. A three battery battalion with a headquarters will be
formed per I MEF and II MEF. There are no plans for III MEF to receive any
MLRS. 22
MANPOWER.
The Marine Corps's battery will be organized into a headquarters section
composed of the commanding officer (MAJ.), executive officer
(Capt), 1st Sgt., and a radio operator. Underneath this element is the Fire
Direction Section, Liaison Section, Survey Section, Medical section, three
Firing Platoons, and a Logistic Section. There are eight officers all MOS
0802 except for one MOS 2110, 104 enlisted, and five Navy medical
personnel. 23
- The commanding officer, who heads the headquarters section, is
responsible for maintenance, resupply, and tactically employment of his
platoons to support the mission. The following sections are subordinate to
the headquarters section and have missions that are required to support
the battery.
- The Fire Direction Section will receive fire missions from higher
headquarters and direct the fires missions to their three platoons. This
section is composed of one officer (0802 Capt.) and ten enlisted men.
- The Liaison Sections mission is to advise the MAGTF or GCE commander
of the MLRS capabilities, and plan and coordinate its fires to support the
commander's operation. This section is composed of two teams; each team
has one officer (0802) and three enlisted personnel.
- The Survey Section is composed of two independent teams with the
responsibility of establishing survey control points in each firing
platoon's area. This section consists of six enlisted personnel.
- The Medical section is composed of five enlisted naval personnel and is
responsible for immediate medical action, for first aid, and for delivering
the injured to higher headquarters for medical treatment.
- The firing Platoon has a headquarter section commanded by a captain
(0802), assisted by six enlisted, and three firing SPLLs. Each SPLL has
three enlisted men to compute firing data and fire the mission. The
responsibility of the platoon commander is to position, coordinate, and
resupply his three SPLLs to support his commander's guidance. There are
three platoons to each battery with a total of three officers and 15 enlisted.
- The last section is logistics which is composed of three subsections of
maintenance, ammunition, and recovery/refueling. Its mission is to keep
the battery resupplied with class I, III, V, and IX supplies and to keep the
battery firing, moving, and communicating. This is the largest section
composing of one officer (Capt 2110) and 45 enlisted.
The 46 enlisted billets are in the fire direction section, liaison section,
survey section, and firing platoons; 39 billets are fire direction MOSs of
0844 amd 0848. The logistic section is composed of Maintenance,
ammunition, supply MOSs. Communication is spread out throuh all sections
with the repair in the logistic section.
LIGHT WEIGHT.
The Marine Corps' version in equiping the MLRS battery is to have the
nine SPLLs suported by MRC vehicles, HMMVVs, dragon wagons, five ton
trucks, 105 trailors, water bulls, CUCV vehicles, a wrecker, and a M578 track
vehicle recovery vehicle. This version has a lot less track vehicle
requirements compared to the Army's Table of Equipment. 24 This system
gives the Marine Corps more flexibility in fighting any type of war, and it
also reduces the load on amphibious ships that gives the Marine Corps the
capability to react to any type of confict with the right type of fire power.
TRAINING REQUIREMENTS.
As stated in a earlier paragraph, the Army has agreed to loan 11 SPLLs to
the Marine Corps for testing and evaluating purposes. This five year
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) also includes having the Army train
our critical billet holders on the MLRS. Most of the personnnel that is
required to operate the MLRS is already organic to the Marine Corps, but
there are two broad areas of critical billet holders that are critical to the
operation of the MLRS: 08's (0802, 0844, and 0848) and 2143 (mechanics for
the Bradley vehicle). School dates are already set up for the 08's and the
2143's in April. If all plans for training are successful, the personnel
required to stand-up the test bed MLRS battery will be ready for duty in
August 199O. 25
The training of the 08's will be a 42 day course at Ft. Sill. For the test
bed battery and for future training, the personnel will be selected from
already trained 0802, 0844, and 0848. The logic to use only these MOSs is
because of their background in working with computers which is an
important requirement for operating the SPLLs. After successfull training,
these Marines will have the MOS of 0802/xx, 0844/xx, and 0848/xx which
will enable them to operate a SPLL or any type of artillery. This system
enables the trained SPLL operator to be more flexible for job assignments
and avoids a small MOS which could harm promotion chanches. 26
The selection of the 2143 MOS for MLRS training, for the test bed battery
and for future units, is based on the same philosphy as the 08's selection
and training. Since the 2143 MOS is already trained for track vehicles,
they only need a modified course covering the Bradley chassis and the
launcher side. It seem at this date that the Army will establish a modified
course in support of the Marin Corps training requirements. 27
The field training for a MLRS battery will not be hindered by impact
area restrictions because of the M28 Practice Rocket LP/C and the M27
Trainer LP/C. The M28 Prcactice Rocket, as discussed in the ammunition
section, is cheaper and after firing there are no bomblets left, and troops
are allowed to freely enter the empact area due to its warhead being armed
with a spotting charges,. The M27 Trainer is a electronic simulation device
that gives the operators a realistic fire mission by receiving readouts on
the fire control panal. The instructor can interject faults such as misfire,
hangfire, and dud fuze. 28 This enables the operators to get high quality
training without costing a cent. A very good system in evaluating the
operators.
COST COMPARISON.
The final subject is the comparison of cost of the MLRS, M1O9A3, M110A2,
and the M198. This comparison is done on the four systems by MCLB Albany
as an estimated annual cost analysis by comparing the replenishment (class
IX), depot, ammunition, and crew cost. The Weapon System Equipment
manager (WS/EM) at Albamy considered the number of weapon system in
both active forces, reserve forces, and depot stores. The numbers used for
MLRS for comparison is the proposed organization of 18 SPLLs in the active
force, 36 SPLLs in the reserve force, and 23 in depot stores. 29
The first area compared is depot stores. The MLRS did very well by
beating all systems except for the M198 system. The total percentage of
cost for depot stores for the MLRS is 15% compared to 55% for the M110A2,
23% for the M109A3, and 8% for the M198 (see figure 9.).
Click here to view image
The next area to be compared is replenishment or repair parts. The
MLRS blew the other systems out of the water by having only 10% of the
replenishment cost compared to 38% for the M110A2, 27% for the M109A3,
and 25% for the M198 (see figure 10.).
Click here to view image
The MLRS won again in the training ammunition catagory by having 12%
of the annual cost compared to 15% for the M110A2, 23% for the M109A3,
and 50% for the M198 (see figure 11.).
Click here to view image
The final area compared is the crew cost. The MLRS has a 12% total
annual crew cost as compared to 27% for the M11OA2. 17% for the M1O9A3
and 44% for the M198 (see figure 12.).
Click here to view image
The total annual cost of sustainment for the MLRS is 12% compared to 31%
for the M110A2, 22% for the M109A3, and 35% for the M198 (see figure 13.).
Click here to view image
One battery of MLRS has more fire power and greater range than a
battalion of the other three systems, and with this in mind, the statistics
done by Albany looks real good for the MLRS. This looks like a prime
example of "more bang for the dollar".
CONCLUSION.
The capabilities of the MLRS are far superior to present day artillery.
The Marine Corps seems to be going in the right direction in testing and
evaluating the MLRS by spending very little money to see if they have a
good product. If the Marine Corps decides to buy the system, SOPs will
already be established to ease the transition of a new system. The minor
problems with maintenance and training have already been solved. Most
third world nations have more artillery than the Marine Corps, and some
third world nations have more artillery than the U. S. military. The MLRS
is the solution to balance this equation. Yes, the system is expensive, but
the sustainment cost will ease the initial cost. As stated in the beginning
of this paper, the decision makers need to look more to future benefits
rather than what will be good today. The MLRS is the hope for the future
and can be an artillery system available to the MAGTF commander 24 hours
a day under any weather condition, with the capability or causing
confusion and destruction in the enemy's rear which will enable the
commander to reach out and influence the battle.
ENDNOTES
1LTV Missiles and Ellectronics Group, Briefing sheets on th MLRS by the prime
contractor, (Quantico: Feb. 1989), pp. 2-3.
2Capt Brian Sutton USA, "Multiple Launch Rocket System," an information
draft, (Ft. Sill, OK).
3Ibid.
4U. S. Marine Corps Concept of Employment for the General Support Rocket
System," a coordinatiog draft, (Washington: Headquarters Marine Corps,
Oct 1984), p. 2-11.
5Sutton
6Col. Thomas J. Kunhart USA, a information brochure (Redstone Arsenal:
MICON, Sep. 1989) p. 8-9.
7Ibid., p. 8.
8Ibid., p. 9.
9Ibid.
10Ibid., p. 8.
11Ibid., p. 9.
12Ibid.
13Ibid.
14U. S. Army, Training Circular 6-60 Multiple Launch Rocket System
(Washington: Dept. of the Army, 1988), Appendix A, p. 1-3.
15Maj. Andrew F. Mazzara, Marine Artillery Rocket: "Back Through The
Future", (Quantico: Command and Staff College, 1987), p. 110.
16Sutton.
17Maj. Frank J. Sansone USMC, a interview (Quantico: MCRDAS 11 Feb.
1990)
18Ibid.
19Sansone, a interview (Quantico: MCRDAS 22 Feb. 1990).
20Ibid.
21Ibid.
22Sansone, a interviev (Quantico: MCRDAS 11 Feb. 1990).
23Ibid.
24Ibid.
25Capt. R. Danchak USCM, "Training Requirements for the Multiple Launch
Rocket System" (MLRS), Memorandum for the Record (Quantico: MCCDC
16 Feb. l990), p. 1.
26Ibid., pp. 1-2.
27Ibid., pp. 2-3.
28Training Circular 6-60 Multiple Launch Rocket Systems p. 1-6.
29Robert Rusconi, a lap brief on the estimated annual cost analysis of the
MLRS,(Albany: MCLB Dec. 1989).
Bibliography
Danchak, R., Capt USMC, Standards Branch, Training and Eductation, MCCDC.
"Training Requirements For The Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS)
Batter". Memorandum For The Record. Quantico, 16 Feb 1990.
Kunhart, Thomas J., Colonel USA, Program Manager MLRS, MICON, Redstone
Arsenal. An information brochure on the MLRS, Sep 1989.
LTV Missiles and Electronics Group. Briefing sheets on the MLRS by the prime
contractor, Quantico, Feb, 1989.
Mazzara, Andrew F., Major USMC. "Marine Artillery Rockets: Back Through
The Futurt." Marine Corps Command and Staff College, Quantico, 1987.
Rusconi, Robert, Weapons System Equipment Manager at MCLB Albany, Ga. A
brief on the estimated annual coat analysis for self-propells artillery
verses MLRS, Dec 1989.
Sansone, Frank J., Major USMC, Project Officer (Code CBGF) MLRS", MCRDAS,
Quantico. An interview on the USMC maintenance concepts of the MLRS, 22
Feb 1990.
Sansone, Frank J., Major USMC, Project Officer (Code CBGF) MLRS, MCRDAS,
Quantico. An interview on the proposed USMC Table of Organization, Table
of Equipment, and employment of the MLRS, 11 Feb 1990.
Smaltz, LtCol USMC, War Fighting Center, MCCDC. A lap brief on MLRS to CG
MCCDC, July 1989.
Sutton, Brian, Capt. USA, New Systems Division, Gunnery Dept.. "Multiple
Launch Rocket System". A draft on the MLRS. Ft. Sill.
U. S. Army. MLRS, MICON, Redstone Arsenal. Briefing charts on the MLRS,
June 1989.
U. S. Army. "Multiple Launch Rocket System, System Description". Student
handout WSXXAA, Ft. Sill, May 1985.
U. S. Army. Training Circular 6-60 Multiple Launch Rocket System Operations.
Washington, D. C., 1988.
U. S. Marine Corps. "U. S. Marine Corps Concept of Employment for the General
Support Rocket System." A coordinating draft. Washington: HQMC (Code
POG), Oct. 1984.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
