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.
|Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list|