The UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) is considering the procurement of an additional 15 M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) launchers and an extra Repair and Recovery Vehicle (RRV), according to a recent parliamentary response from Maria Eagle, Minister of State for Defence.

In response to a written question from James Cartlidge MP, Eagle confirmed that the UK currently has 61 M270 MLRS launchers and eight RRVs on order with the US Department of Defense. She noted that these figures “have not changed since 5 July 2024”, but added that “the MOD is currently considering the procurement of a further 15 MLRS and one RRV.”

Image Crown Copyright

Alongside the possible expansion of the MLRS fleet, the UK has committed £800 million over the next decade to Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (GMLRS) and Extended Range GMLRS (ER-GMLRS) missiles. However, Eagle stated that the precise number of missiles remains confidential, saying “the stockpile number remains classified.”

The UK’s workshare in the MLRS and RRV programme accounts for approximately 6% of the total programme value, ensuring that British industry remains involved in the modernisation of long-range artillery systems.

The potential acquisition of more MLRS launchers and enhanced munitions stockpiles reflects the UK’s growing focus on long-range fires and deep-strike capabilities.

The M270 MLRS has demonstrated its battlefield effectiveness, particularly in Ukraine, where its high-precision strike capability has played a pivotal role. If approved, the additional MLRS units and munitions investment would significantly enhance the British Army’s ability to deliver accurate, long-range firepower.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

103 COMMENTS

  1. Good news and it’s about time the RA got the attention it needs. These and other similar systems are becoming the key currency in modern warfare and I’m sure more missile types will be considered going forward.

  4. Given the vagaries of our cousins from across the sea and the vagaries of political allegiance as well as there demonstrated willingness to cut off aspects of intelligence and infrastructure it seems like a bad idea to being making such a large investment into an artillery system so tied to GPS.

      • The companies producing and selling them will. As will the employees if foreign military sales slumped.

        The appalling attitude you show, mirrored by Trump, Vance, Musk et al will result in those sale slumping, and then later job losses. The US military alone can’t sustain the US military industrial complex, especially as Musk will probably also gut the US military.

          • No he hasn’t. He has requested 8% ($50 billion) from current programs which will then be put towards homeland missile defense.

          • Which still means reduced orders from the US military.

            Between reduced US military spending and Europe slowly weaning off US military sales over the next decade or so, the US MIC will definitely shrink, losing a lot of jobs.

          • indeed. 2023/24 US defense spending ended at just over $1Trillion (3.4% of GDP). March 2024 and the US govt approved a 2025 defense budget of $840 billion…estimated to be 2.9% of 2025 GDP. Early budget work for 2026 shows the Cash expenditure staying at about $840billion but with GDP forecast to grow (Pre tarrif fiasco) that would likely see defense spending fall to +/- 2.7%. Hard to predict where US GDP will head but certainly plans are no increase in cash expenditure

      • The U.S. companies that will be losing out on the hundreds of millions in orders will care as will the people in the jobs…you are a very disruptive individual, it would not surprise me if you were not a CCP political warfare operative.

        • Have you noticed that it never replies? Just comments a snide remark and disappears. Whether because it cannot support or sustain its argument, or is a bot account I’m not sure.

      • I think they will.

        Someone will wake up eventually, but Mr Chump is a terminal narcissist, and JD Pants is too far up Thiel’s rabbithole.

    • Less of an issue now that GPS compatible data can be obtained from OneWeb’s new Astra package. The government clearly had plans when they rode to the rescue of OneWeb – OneWeb was assisted in the development by the National Physics Laboratory.

      • Right. This is the name of the company I was looking for weeks ago. Now owned by a French holding company it would appear?

        • Oneweb?

          It merged with Eutelsat to form a British-French company, in which the UK still has a Golden Share.

          If you look on Youtube for an interview entitled “Europe Steps Up Satellite Capabilities Amid Doubts Over Musk’s Starlink”, it is with the head of Eutelsat about potential applications such as OneWeb picking up some slack in Ukraine where Starlink is at risk.

          Their shares are up by 600% since Feb 28 !

    • I agree although keeping the ones we have up to date and buying more ammo for them is wise.

      All future purchases should be from trustworthy pro democratic countries.

    • Flashing the appropriate amount of coin of the realm will outweigh any other possible factor during the tenure of the current US administration. Trade balances “Trump” every other possible consideration. Gold sovereigns on the barrel head preferred please, maties. 😉😁

    • The trouble is Trump can exert pressure on Israel and South Korea not to supply us. Remember Israel vetoed supply of SPIKE/MELS to Ukraine.

      • Israel is not only keeping in with Trump. There are a lot of Israelis who were born in Russia. Other European nations have turned to GMARS, Euro Puls & the Chunmoo. We would not be alone.

    • You have problem with Trump because:

      -Trump says for you to pay what you agreed for NATO and you don’t.
      -Trump also warned on energy dependency from Russia and you did not cared. Today Europe still buy more value in Oil from Russia than helps Ukraine.
      -You don’t care to destroy NATO on Ukraine, an issue which is not NATO.

      So point 1 and 3 is evidence that NATO is not a priority for W.Europe. Neither is Ukraine btw. No troops for Ukraine. No nuclear armed Euro country extended the nuclear umbrella to Ukraine.

      All of these issues are not Trump. Are Euro choices.

  6. I have no issue with supplementing and supporting existing US derived kit.
    We hamstring ourselves dropping it, it is not realistic.
    That does not extend to buying more US makes that we do not have in service , over alternate UK or European types.
    That to me is a sensible compromise.

    • This is a key point, this is a small expansion of equipment already in use that was already planned last year, it wouldn’t make sense to go for alternatives unless the full fleet was due to be replaced.

      Money is tight enough that this is still being considered rather than purchased despite the requirement of 76 already being set, the option is additional m270s or no additional MLRS as replacing the fleet isn’t a realistic option without cuts elsewhere and there are already capability gaps without adding to it.

      • Only if we’re either going to buy a significant amount ourselves or can secure a lot of export orders. Otherwise it ends up being prohibitively expensive.

        A better bet would probably be to join into a European project which could then use economies of scale.

    • Agree, it’s not something we can easily replace or build ourselves, so in this case it’s suck it up. But when it comes time for a replacement then I hope lesions are learnt about sovereign capabilities in something as core as long range precision fires.

      • I’m pretty sure we could build ourselves BAE systems already builds rockets for artillery im pretty sure there capable of putting together a MLRS system but it’s the GPS system that’s more of a problem I wish we had our own system to be honest

        • Could the European Gallileo not be used to develop ordnance? Surely the UK could negotiate back into it if the EU wants us to provide them with a defence backstop (nuclear). UK spent £1.5 bn on Galileo then thanks to brexit idiocy on both sides we got locked out. This seems shortsighted and mutually damaging if it has military uses. Perhaps UK should insist on being reinstated at a full partner level in view of current defence situation.

    • M8 it’s not just items we buy from the US, it’s ability to restrict our use of them and some kit we think of as being home grown. The US turned off the intelligence Tap to Ukraine but also told us stop sharing US supplied intelligence with them as well.
      So that’s Storm Shadow effectively crippled as its high end accuracy ability is down to US TERCOM data.

      • The US ability to prevent the use of TERCOM is quite scary. One wonders how long it would take us to supplement with our own maps. 25 years ago when storm shadow was being developed radio altimeter maps of the earth where probably rather hard to do. However now a days there are plenty of commercial options and we are even just about to deploy our own SAR satellite constellation.

        Hopefully FC/ASW uses something more independent.

        It’s become quite astounding how many silly little vulnerabilities we have allowed into our defence force to save a few quid so we could always keep contributing at the “right” level to US global operations.

  9. This is just part of the previously planned acquisition of 15 units taking the MLRS fleet from 61 units to 76 units which was supposed to be the army requirement reported on last year with the purchase expected this year.

    This isn’t anything new or an additional acquisition on top of the 76 units target, just a confirmation that they are still considering whether to follow through on the reported plan from last year rather than a plan for a further acquisition from 76 to 91 units.

    Atleast it wasn’t the waiting for the results of the SDR line.

  11. I belive we need to bring back National Service not only would it give the youngsters opportunity for travel would broaden their knowledge and horizons possibly a trade for some to go forward in the future

    • “Youngest to travel” you’re joking right. You can get to anywhere in Europe for less than £100. You can get to Asia for £500 return. US £450. Travel is open to everyone on and for a very cheap fee.

      Only people who say “bring back national service” are normally too old to be called up.

      You sound like this is something they would want and if conscription in most conflicts around the world. It doesn’t work if you want a credit force. If they wanted to join the military, they would have. Who wants to be in the army on a base in the backend of nowhere. Nobody. Grim.

    • Do we have barrack room space given the base closures over recent years, to suddenly increase head count?

    • We don’t have the infrastructure to bring back national service .And at the moment we’ve got Thousands of Ukrainians in training for the Battlefield ,although I do agree with you .

    • The forces don’t want national service, nor do we need it. All we need is to recruit & train more troops/airmen/sailors etc, buy more kit so we expand to at least the bare minimum for peacetime, hopefully going beyond that to a force necessary to drive Russia out of UKR & credibally deter fiurther aggression. UK forces have been woefully below minimal peacetime levels for decades.
      The last thing we need are hoards of unwiling, disaffected, inapropriate kids being dragooned through military training wasting the skills of those who should be concentrating on enlarging the pool of trained professionals. Select the willing, we don’t need millions of conscripts simply to be fed into a meat grinder.

      • That’s the thing sadly there’s not enough willing ,and those who are it takes far to long to be recruited. However the way forces have been treat over the year’s Cuts , housing etc you can’t blame them.

    • Rather than National Service, I would suggest a voluntary scheme that rewarded the volunteer.
      Maybe something along the lines of 10-week basic training course before university entry earning a voucher redeemeble against academic or vocational tuition fees, all the way up to 12 months (i.e. a gap year) paying (say) a full years tuition fees. Plus, of course, being a reservist for (say) 12 to 18 months after
      Couple it with easy transfer to full-time or Part-time Reserve for those that want it, or incentives to join University training units or do similar training (with similar incentives) during vacations
      Much more likely to attract motivated individuals & convert some to considering the forces as a career, than national service

  12. We don’t have enough of anything, so anything more is good news. I understand why we’ve gone American since we already operate this system but in the longer term I would like to see us move away from purchasing US made equipment. Trump will only be around for 4 years but we need to have more options ready for the next Trump style president.

  14. Am I the only one who is concerned that buying American weapons is rapidly becoming a bad idea and that it may come with a few undocumented features the Americans may be keeping to themselves. Like the ability to remotely mess with the targeting or even turn them off.

    • Last article I read on this page said were were getting 87 new MLRS now it’s 61 ???? Even 61 is a bold number, we do not have the manpower to crew these vehicles nevermind maintain them across the two PF Regiments. Those Regiments in their current states have 1RRV each and no one qualified to operate the crain and drive (and they don’t work) the Government and top brass live in a world of make-believe and need to wake up and smell the oil that is pissing out the hull.

  15. We really need to look at our ban on using cluster munitions as well. The ukraine war has again demonstrated how effective they are against mechanised units and in counter battery fire.

  17. This will be smoke and mirrors to get to the already declared number whilst pretending it’s new.
    2 pods Vs 1 for Himars is an advantage Vs complexity and costs of tracked systems Vs the fact we already have experience with it.
    The army has an awkward max of wheels and tracked going forward.
    C2 plus Ajax , M270 are tracked , the troops travelling in Boxer and 155mm in RH155 wheeled vehicles. There isn’t enough heavy transporters to go round in any case but a unit would seem to lose the advantage of speed of advance of a wheeled vehicle if the armour and rocket artillery has to trail behind on tracks of heavy transporters.

  18. Old news reformatted, the target was always 75 but not ever fully confirmed, we had 64 once that dropped to about 44 due writes offs and RRV conversions. Great if we get so many but we would need more DROPS type vehicles and much larger ammo stocks. Thats the bit we will likely cut corners on so we have lots of launchers but not much ammo.
    Any one got details on what the MLRS RRV A2 looks like etc? since are meant up grading to 10 of them.

  19. Good news, but as ever we all want to see more on order.

    MRLS/Hi-Mars has proved their worth in UKR, outranging and with better accuracy than anything Russians can field.

    If UKR had dozens more of these with full ammo, the Russians would be retreating by now.

  20. were getting 87 new MLRS now it’s 61 ???? Even 61 is a bold number, we do not have the manpower to crew these vehicles nevermind maintain them across the two PF Regiments. Those Regiments in their current states have 1RRV each and no one qualified to operate the crain and drive (and they don’t work) the Government and top brass live in a world of make-believe and need to wake up and smell the oil that is pissing out the hull.

  21. Why do we constantly disclose what we are buying and newly developed weapons. Can only be of benefit to potential enemies.

  22. Hi mars are great it’s a delivery system more so ammunition types vary proven very accurate usefull though they are in same leauge as storm shadow. It remains to be seen i don’t think it serve any use but a uav strike force that’s were the future invest should be for Britain also proven essential on battle field.

  23. Time to reinstate LIMARS on the Supercat 6*6 chasssis.
    Yes it would increase the number of soldiers required to operate it, but it would be quicker on the roads than “tracked”, and also cheaper to purchase and maintain.

  24. Just get ours back from the Notsis in Ukraine if there are any left

    Why do we need the tracked variant anyway. They weren’t much use and a rethink is required.

    They also need to be a TA unit.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here