The U.S. Army said it successfully demonstrated Lockheed Martin’s next-generation Extended-Range GMLRS (ER GMLRS) against a target set at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico.
Fired from a U.S. Army HIMARS launcher, two ER GMLRS rockets achieved flight trajectory, range and accuracy from launch to impact.
The rockets also engaged a target set meeting criteria for missile performance.
“The Army’s success in this operational test further demonstrates the readiness of ER GMLRS and overall capability of our family of munitions,” said Jay Price, vice president for Precision Fires at Lockheed Martin.
“Our capabilities provide range options, affordability and of course the continued precision of this enhanced system.”
The operational test, say Lockheed Martin, moves ER GMLRS closer to fielding and production. The rocket will be built at Lockheed Martin’s Precision Fires Center of Excellence in Camden, Arkansas.
“Lockheed Martin has produced more than 70,000 GMLRS rounds and is under annual contract to continue production of GMLRS unitary and alternative-warhead rockets including integrated logistics support for the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps and international customers. The systems are produced at the company’s Precision Fires Center of Excellence in Camden, Arkansas.”
It Would be nice if Congress could actually free up funds and send some to Ukraine. I’m hearing now the Donald’s latest policy is for Europe to repay all the money America has sent to Ukraine and use it to build an American Academy that will be better than Harvard but not teach any “liberal stuff” Given the pitifully small amount of money the US has sent I’m not sure what kind of Academy he thinks he could build or why he would think “Europe” would owe him money. Unfortunately he is currently leading at 55% in the polls so… Read more »
There is a slight problem with Trumps pipe dreams. Being president doesn’t make you a god.
Oh as president he would expect to be able to fire God.
Sshh don’t tell him almost all of the money was actually spent in the US!
.. and actually saved them money on decommissioning a great deal of the supplied equipment. Note they were very slow on supplying stuff that was modern and part of their longer term inventory.
The US would answer you with that old American saying, “Don’t let the screen door hit you in the (rear) on the way out.”
How Much Aid Has the U.S. Sent Ukraine? Here Are Six Charts. | Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)
A “pitifully small amount” indeed.
Fortunately the 25% of the Republican party are thinking people with some understanding of world geopolitics so Never #45 voters and with Independents and Democrats will make it numerically and electorally impossible for the wannabe dictator and deluded fantasist to win an election. He may crow about his primary success but his electoral record since 2016 is a solid failure. The land of the free and home of the brave has a strong preference for Democracy and functioning government for We The People not just one person.
The US can have whomever they like as president. It’s a free country. “What are we going to build?” – “an Academy” “Who is going to pay for it?” – “Europe” Nah doesn’t have the same ring to it. This “We don’t want to be involved in any more European wars” plays well with Americans until they realise the issue is not Europe it is right and wrong. It also makes them look weak and it is only a matter of time before someone takes advantage. Saw the State of the Union. Biden looked almost alive. I can see much… Read more »
If Europe spent as much on defense as they do whining about Trump, they wouldn’t need US assistance.
NATO without the United States still spends circa 3x what Russia is currently spending. As for Trump, I think 91 felony charges, plus his civil sex offence case, should give people pause for thought. Don’t you think?
No. Any local crackpot prosecutor can bring charges, every city in America has one. In this case it is clearly politically motivated law fare. Do you remember the “Russia collusion” the media pushed for 2 years straight that turned out to be a total fake plot to discredit him by Hillary Clinton’s aides? The media pushed that for half his presidency like it was sworn fact. Or the Moscow ‘hookers story’? or the claims he had ties to Epstein? All Fake. A conservative state could just as easily start charging democrat politicians. The media is in full collusion with the… Read more »
You see what you want and judge reality accordingly. Virtually every thing you have said there has not been disproved, just claimed to have been by Trump and his brown nosing lackeys and believed by the unquestioning sheep. Indeed Russian political interference is pretty much accepted by all objective and sane experts, it’s just the degree that is in dispute. It’s actually laughable that so many gullible people see his ilk as an alternative to corrupt self serving politicians, not seeing despite the historical evidence that those most corrupt politicians have always been used and operated as mere frontmen by… Read more »
The USA has warned Europe to arm up for decades. The Germans literally laughed in our faces. We wish the best, but if you cannot beat Russia with the Ukrainian army, you won’t win with European ones. Most countries have less than a week worth of munitions on hand, once the body bags start rolling in, the desire to sue for peace will be imminent. But hey, free healthcare while thumbing noses at the stupid Americans. 🤓 Democrats could EASILY solve the Ukraine funding release by fixing the crisis on the southern US border, but they are playing the long… Read more »
I agree on your point about Germany although they are rapidly changing but why do you want to punish people in Ukraine for it.
What does any of this have to do with Imigration?
Democrats refuse to do anything about the millions of migrants currently pouring across the southern US border creating lawlessness. Dems hope to give the migrants voting and citizen status to assist them in winning future elections.
They nearly tricked the republicans with a rigged plan that did nothing material to fix the problem.
Until this is fixed in a serious way via a bill in congress, republicans won’t approve Ukraine aid.
I’d heard Tony Blair did exactly the same here from 97 onwards, to feather Labour’s nest and to “Rub the rights nose in it”
Whether people in this country approved of that is another matter.
The previous left wing lunatic trying for PM in 2019 was proposing to give all recent economic migrant and asylum seeker arrivals the vote, and to close immigration centres.
I wonder what the next lot will do when they get in.
With your last part: Why should New York, LA, London and Paris get nuked because the Russians roll into Estonia? It’s not worth it and undermines the entire purpose of the alliance. Europe stands together. The example you may understand would be why should the USA act if Maine got hit. It’s not worth it. If the USA wants out of nato, Europe will stay together and adapt to put off Russia. The only time nato has actually been been used for war was when the USA got hit in 2001. Members stood with the USA and went to war… Read more »
Does Europe stand together? I don’t see all European nations in the Red Sea right now? I think many are happy to be in NATO for the comfy blanket they think it gives them but actually stand up and fight? Lets hope we never find out.
I’d trust the nordic nations, Baltic states, Poland, Germany ( yes ) France, Netherlands, if it came to it. Spain, Italy, Greece, Turkey not so much!
There a number of European countries in the Red Sea plus an entire EU mission, but NATO in general relies on us and the USN to do the boattie bit.
Hi Jim. Yes, at last. Some took their sweet time turning up.
For me, the UK and USA remain the bedrock of NATO in that we actually step up when it comes to it.
Yes agree, that being said I’m very happy for us to keep focusing on the sea, let Poland, Germany, Finland etc build a massive army. We guard the north and the sea while they guard the east and the French can keep fannying around in Africa and the US can continue to keep the North Atlantic Area safe from Mexico 😀
While I’m RN, RAF centric the Army is now too small mate. So we need to invest more there too.
Yes, going back up to a second deployable division in my mind is the most important move we could make even if we can only assign 2 manoeuvre units to each. Lots of brigade or battalion sized NATO and JEF units available but not enough division sized units they can fit in. Being able to deploy in an emergency at core level of 2 Divisions should be our aspiration and not something out of our reach. Converting all the C2 to C3 should be a priority even if we can’t field them all and buying even more Archer and M270… Read more »
Agree. 2 Divisions is not a huge army, but suitable for a seafaring nation like the UK with commitments.
Needs to be resourced correctly though, and by that I mean 3 manoeuvre brigades in each, with the full set of CS CSS.
They’re well below that at present. An IRBAT tweek can happen, like Dern has demonstrated, but the CSS needs to be found from somewhere and that means more personnel.
We (and NATO) have never really taken role specialisation seriously, so I don’t see that we should invest mostly in the Navy whilst letting the army slide backwards.
We have always deployed a strong army to the Continent alongside allies in face of a threat from a major power or Axis.
Build a massive army LOL!!!
That ‘massive army’ exists in theoretical ideas in Berlin and Finland. The real armies fly the Union Jack and old glory.
I feel Turkey has its own agenda. Depends which way the wind is blowing and even then who knows.
It does. I don’t trust them at all.
And Hungary, under current management. Has anyone analyzed the Balkan states?
Indeed even Slovakia and then not to mention Serbia. Russia still has friends in Europe. Turkey is a strange one, clearly not intimated by Russia as shown by their Shoot down a couple of years back, but since then their ties seem to have become stronger..
France and Germany?!? Hmmm…ok, we will give them the benefit of the doubt…🤔😳🤞. Certainly would not bet the farm on that wager. 😁
I know what you mean mate. For Germany, I do give them the benefit of the doubt as I for one do get their deep historical reluctance post ww2 to get involved. If we had been utterly defeated in war we might well behave similarly. Especially considering the ground over where this war is taking place. With France, when you look beyond the political schenanagins I think they’re too big and proud a nation not to be involved in the event of NATO war with Russia. Certainly posters here who have served with them on ops speak highly of them… Read more »
All European NATO countries including France and Germany deployed troops when Article 5 was last called. Plus a whole lot of other European countries.
Yes, but the stakes involved, in terms of national survival, were relatively minimal. The next time, when an angry bear is stalking woodsmen in the forest, could well be for existential stakes.
True. But if the next occasion is existential wouldn’t all NATO nations be even more likely (guaranteed) to deploy?
I see no evidence that any European nation (including the previously mentioned examples of France and Germany) would refuse to turn out and fight if the Bear invaded a NATO country.
What we are all worried about is whether the Eagle would turn up to take on the Bear!
Excellent, probably rhetorical, question. If the US would choose a truly isolationist path in the future (to the point of formally withdrawing from NATO), then its behavior during a crisis would become more problematic. Deem this to be a very low probability event, but for the first time since WW II, not a zero probability event. Actually, the same scenario could unfold in the Indo-Pacific, if mutual defense treaties are terminated in the future. 🤔😳😱
Thanks. It’s tough being ‘the worlds policeman’ – we did it for a few hundred years. The world becomes a more dangerous place if the US is ever unable or unwilling to come to the aid of Europe, Taiwan….and others.
Yes, if the US falters, the UK will be the principal, perhaps sole, lynchpin of NATO. But that course will require severe measures including a probable return to conscription and expenditure of 6-8% of GDP by MoD.
It’s great to have the American perspective – it often shocks us! We have only ever had conscription in world wars (the extension of national service from 1945 to 1960 was a total aberration caused by needing large forces in peacetime for the initial period of the Cold War when mass was all-important, but also (perhaps a more pressing factor) to cover the period of the most activity in dismantling the British Empire). Politicians and the public will not accept conscription in peacetime. Plus we have lost the infrastructure required by conscription ie we would need many large barracks and… Read more »
Yes, thanks for the elaboration of the probable consequences resulting from the proposition. Truly a daunting, non-trivial course of action.
The European assistance in Afghanistan sans UK, Demark and a few others was useless. The US spent more resources moving and accommodating allies than it would have taken to accomplish internally.
The UK is unique. France is capable. The rest of Europe offers little to no strategic defense value.
Wasn’t always the case though, many European forces were very capable in the Cold War and are rapidly improving now, Poland is a real stand out.
Agreed, the Poles (and the Baltic States), largely as the result of geography, have become preoccupied w/ events unfolding to the East. Believe the Poles, in the future, will become interested in participating in the NATO nuclear response contingency program (regardless of the then current program’s formal title). This is exactly the same outlook the Finns and Swedes have adopted recently, based upon current events. The UK, as well as the US, has been blessed by (relative) geographical isolation, but as 9/11 demonstrated, there are no guarantees. Consider the hypothetical (and extremely remote probability) scenario, wherein Mad Vlad and the… Read more »
While Poland is improving, the rest are talking a big game and doing nothing. Many continental European ‘powers’ are always eager to spend American money and blood on European land wars. AUKUS/an anglo alliance is the future, the rest are too unreliable.
Hi Chris, where do you get your info? I had not heard that the US had to move and accomodate many Allies into and in Afghanistan – that’s a revelation to me.
I am rather shocked by your assessment that all but the US, UK and France have strategic defence value ie have capable militaries. That rather damns 29 NATO countries.
I rate as impressive: Poland and all the Baltic nations (Norway, Sweden, Finland). Turkey scores highly on the Global Power Index (8th in the world).
Well you obviously have no inking of what the Dane’s in particular are like! Ok so they needed help getting there ask 2 para and other UK units and I think you will find they were bloody good!
Maine wasn’t in the Soviet Union. It has no historical ties to Russia. Ridiculous false equivalence.
In that case, we’d like your Eastern Seaboard back please.
Oh, could you pop over to Canada and tell them we’d like most of their territory as well?
Why did NATO step up when the US is the only country to invoke Article 5 after 9/11? Was it worth it then?
No, it wasn’t. That’s exactly my point. Only two other NATO countries (The UK and Canada) even had the physical ability to transport themselves to Afghanistan, The rest we had to load up like kids going on vacation while they cried and said “NO TROOPS IN COMBAT PLZ” (Germany).
Why did Johnson and co not allow Langfords bill then?that had the border and aid to Ukr in it together!could it be trump wants to campaign on the border issue?
It didn’t materially fix the issue. Smoke and mirrors.
NATO without the USA would also not have a China problem. America brings great forces with it but massive threats as well. European NATO and Canada can easily contain Russia.
Perhaps, in the short term. However, longer term, make no mistake, ChiComs would be coming after your chitlins, and every EU country. Guaranteed.
Comical. China would conquor Europe in short order, that’s why it wouldn’t have a ‘China problem’. They already have a massive surveillance apparatus over Europe with Huawei.
Thought you MAGA mob were supporters of free speech, what goes around comes around after all you never stop going on about European Leaders if they dare show a little independence, geez even Boris got it last week for daring to speak his mind. Hypocracy really isn’t a good look.
European leaders are free to do what they wish. Begging to spend American money and blood on a European land war isn’t some innovative bold move by European leadership.
Trump and MAGA congress are only harming America with this stunt, what’s the point in spending more money on defence than god if everyone thinks you are too scared and too divided to use it. This is the exact same congressional antics that embolden Japan to attack America in 1941 and Germany to declare war.
thankfully usa politics is their business. NATO/europe should do more, many had a free ride. trump was very funny to invite russian invasion of the less committed to NATO, they should wake up.
The problem is they perform a unique role in NATO, they are not easily replaced. Their politics is their own business until it starts affecting other people. We should make our future plans accordingly as we are way to closely integrated. Starting trident D5 replacement with our own missile should be top priority. Investing in space assets with a wide set of partners as well as our own sovereign capability should be next. Beyond that we can get by fine with or without the USA. It’s also worth noting if the Donald does leave a future US Government may not… Read more »
Our intelligence community is hand in glove with that of the US. At an agency and military level. We wouldn’t get on fine at all.
On the US pulling out of NATO? I’d bet more on Martians landing. How is that going to happen when NATO C3 is so intricantly linked with them and all the bases they have in Europe, and the ME, that depend on Europe based communications and intelligence facilities.
Not a chance. I think it’s pure scaremongering.
US Congress passed a Bill mid-Dec last year to prohibit the President from unilateraly leaving NATO.
Evening mate. Thanks. Yes, it’s scaremongering nonsense.
It’s clearly a bill to get around a deluded President making a bad decision for their country and for the Western world.
Yes, but no one knows if it’s legal for congress to do so, also he can pull out of the military side and remain on the political side like France in the 60’s or just refuse to invoke article 5 which he has already said he will do.
Surely an illegal Bill would not get passed?
Anyway, as you say a future President Trump can leave the military structure as France did.
Interesting as to whether a member country can veto a NATO decision to invoke Article 5.
By get on fine I mean the UK and European NATO could defend itself from Russia. I don’t like the idea of the US leaving NATO but the Donal does and he has a 5% polling lead so what to do. We need to be prepared especially on trident.
UK and European NATO should increase capability so that we can defend ourselves from Russia without US assistance. We have many wealthy nations – UK, France, Germany, Italy are all G7. We have been enhanced by Finland and Sweden joining NATO.
Say what you want about Europe defence expenditure. The reality is only one country has ever triggered article 5, and it cost Europe Billions and 1000s of lives lost. And at the end America didn’t care one bit about what we had to say. Well hopefully when you isolationist Americans finally get that war with China you’ve been drawling about for years, you can fight it on you’re own.
And the US quickly learned how useless it was. The Germans wouldn’t even allow their units to enter “combat prone areas”. The French couldn’t get out of Mali without US help, and couldn’t conduct a week long bombing campaign of Libya without being backfilled by US munition stocks. I think you guys are clueless to how far European defense capabilities have fallen since the Cold War. It’s like a parent with adult dependent children who refused to get a job for two decades and are now shocked that they’re broke. Europe’s failure to plan doesn’t constitute a crisis for the… Read more »
You are perhaps too critical. All NATO European countries responded to Article 5 by deploying troops thousands of miles from home on a major operational deployment against a ruthless enemy, plus many other countries – 50 in all. One of those 50 countries can be criticised. But let’s not lose sight of the big picture – everyone turned out and lost ‘blood and treasure’. The French in Mali is not a similar example – BTW, we Brits also helped the French out in Mali. I don’t think anyone on UKDJ is clueless about the drop in European defence capabilities since… Read more »
Ruthless enemy 😂 Ukraine is going to lose and the US will hold continental Europe to the (Russian) fire. If that doesn’t wake them up, off to AUKUS we go. The current situation in central/Eastern Europe is a war liability for the USA, not an asset. It’s the same reason we don’t enter into mutual defense agreements with countries like Taiwan, there is nothing to gain – everything to lose. For the record I don’t lump the UK in with “Europe” and I don’t believe many other Americans do either. Though smaller than in years past, you guys still show… Read more »
When I was in Afghanistan I certainly thought that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban were ruthless. Turning to Ukraine, you seem very sure that Ukraine is going to lose. Russia has a history of withdrawing its forces from its ‘overses adventures’ if success eludes them – that might happen again? Also if Putin loses power due to ill-health, coup or assassination, his successor might end their war? I do think that Europe should be able to defend itself against Russia without US intervention, but that day is a long way off and requires all European countries, especially Euro-NATO members and non-neutrals,… Read more »
Fortunately, countries like Poland are taking a more sensible approach to solving this potential problem and will be in a position to use them if required to do so.
Lots happening with ER munitions at the moment.
Courtesy Of Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K239_Chunmoo
You really have no clue what you talking about.
Yes his latest BS is sounding remzrkedly like my pre ious statements about how MAGA being based on how it became great before exploiting a war in Europe to boost the US economy. He has said that Europe can make its own weapons or buy American at whatever price they decide to sell to us at and defend ourselves. He will if stupidly just love an expanded conflict in Europe keeping Russia busy so he can concentrate on China reducing European competitiveness economically and having to buy large amounts of US weaponry on terms he dictates. Short term benefit for… Read more »
There is no great American conspiracy to hold Europe down. Pacifist-socialist economic policies and infighting keep European defense programs on their knees. Look at how few times the UK can complete a program with the French or Germans without political infighting. The UK can’t even sell an existing jet program (typhoon) to an existing customer (KSA) due to political objections by the germans.
Too many Chiefs in Europe and not enough Indians.
Seem to remember you not being able to sell F16 to Argentina because of uk export ban, is that infighting?
Not able to or unwilling? The US plays nice to keep the rules based order alive.
Well at least we ain’t got a load of Cowboys !
Europe will pull the plug on US kit and spend the money on kit produced in Europe by European firms.
The US MIC will lose a load of customers and more importantly, money. Dons brilliant, best plan in the world ever plan , to MAGA will nosedive. That would result in unemployment at places like Raytheon, Boeing, LM, GD etc. If that happens then his support base will wither away, and he will need to stay away from 3 floor windows.
Honestly if the US is pulling out of NATO because it’s scared of Russia why in earth would it continue to spend $800 billion on defence. Who woukd it be defending against? Mexico?
Maybe they just want all the Uber kit to run past the Whitehouse for Trumps parade.
Would they seriously be pulling out of Europe all together to double down against China in the pacific.
China is no where near them.
I don’t get MAGA Geo politics 😀
In one interview a trump supporter said Russia was only taking back what was theirs! Now imagine that when Russia wants Alaska back the Mexicans want Texas and California we want our eastern colonies back and if we go far enough back the original Americans can have their land back as well! I wonder what she would say then😂
I think the king had 13 colonies over there as well at some point he might want back 😀
They’re free to give it a shot. Something tells me they won’t.
Touched a nerve have we?
So who gets to keep their sovereign land is decided by military power? So much for the rules-based order you seemed to support above.
Go for it. It has been tried multiple times.
So is this a different missile to the precision strike missile?
A cheap rocket may be needed also. Grid square removal fell out of favour for precision but precision only works if you know exactly where the targets are.
Banning land mines and cluster bombs completely does perhaps seem a little short sighted as there is limited scenarios where they are the best answer.
We didn’t ban the completely, we just got the Americans to keep them so we can pretend to be civilised.
Totally agree though, nonsense to give us such weapons when our enemies freely use them.
In a similar vein, I wonder if British troops would be allowed to take up prepared positions behind landmines which have been set down by our allies who are not party to the Mine Ban Convention.
You mean like we in the West held our nose and looked the other way with the Russians in WW2. Mind you better than actually encouraging it as the MAGA crowd seem prone to do now, so the direction of travel is hardly positive.
Neither the US or Ukraine have signed the CCM, hence the US supplying them to UKr. As for a cheap rocket, there is the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb by SAAB, in use already I believe.
MS wrote:
“”So is this a different missile to the precision strike missile””
Yes, according to the Lockheed Martins website (the above link takes you to) there are 6 missiles per pod, the Precision strike missile comes in at 2 to a Pod with the ATACMs at 1 to a Pod
You can see why Poland is acquiring so many HIMARS. Took 2 years for Russia to take one out. Would like to see Europe develop its own system as there is as much likelihood Trump will sell them to Russia as many European Countries.
I am already thinking back to LIMAWS(R)! army-technology.com: “LIMAWS(R) (lightweight mobile artillery weapon system – rocket) was being developed to provide the Royal Artillery’s fire support to the British Army’s light and rapid reaction forces. Fire support to heavy forces is provided by heavier systems such as the 25t multiple-launch rocket system (MLRS). A date for MoD main gate approval had not been announced but was expected in 2008. However in May 2008, the UK MoD announced the cancellation of the LIMAWS(R) programme. Instead an additional 12 MLRS M70A1 launchers are to be upgraded to the B1 standard. LIMAWS(R) lightweight… Read more »
Thanks buddy for clearing that up.
Thanks to lady di we banned anti personnel mines not anti tank.
Is there any backwards compatability worth existing rocket stockpiles. Or will this new extended range capability increase the likelihood of Ukraine being supplied more of the current stockpile?