2nd MAF ASTROS II MLRS regiment are operational!!!!!

LXC SG

It has been mentioned that the ASTROS is manually reloaded and is slow to reload but exactly how is it reloaded, one tube at a time or swap the empty tubes rack for a full one? What about other rocket artillery system like the american MLRS?
Thanks for answering my questions.

tripwire SG

what wet dream?? more like i just burst your fantasy....

as far as i concern... you can drop dead... i dont give a damn about you wanna share anything... its your choice...

but just because you wanna share ... doesnt mean we have to share and follow your imagination....

HARIMAU SG

Again another posting based on speculation and in accurate facts......brother the SS80 rounds is damn huge....heavy some more.....heard about ASTROS reload and resupply vehicles???They dont called it MLR system for nothing

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

MLRS reload takes forever, they better shoot and scoot if they can, or risk getting blown to kingdom come. The logistical support of any MLRS “system” reflects it’s very vulnerability. You don’t have to take out the launcher to take them out. Firing a shell into the midst of the ASTROS system means that chances are some critical link in the “system” will be taken out.

gary1910 SG

Look at the picture below with crane and personnel from the resupply veh, therefore manual, no autoloading. There is why they are slow, by looking at the pictures , I am not surprise that it would take an hour to reload all four rockets.

Whether they are remove and replace all 4 rockets tubes at go or one by one , I have no idea.

CHARGE!!!

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

I can almost imagine all of them blasting apart violently from a hit by some stray arty shell or smart bomb.

Tatically that thing is a one shot wonder, after which it becomes a liability where the crew has to scoot and reload. And of course, reloading on the move is only a remote possibility. Of course, now you have to divert resources to defend what is an inaccucrate, one shot system because it is too precious or expensive to lose.

Is it any surprise MLRS systems traditionally have been used in situtations of superiority where they are not expecting any incoming mail? Something prehaps a certain army failed to consider?

I wonder which is cheaper, and has more tatical value as well? 18 Primus or 18 ASTROS II? Which is easier to replace? Requires less manpower?

Sometimes you get good results if you set modest goals, instead of getting what appears to be at first, the biggest gun in the region.

gary1910 SG

No way that the Astros could be reloaded on the move , look at the gaint tubes from the picture I have posted.

You see that the resupply veh has hydraulic stands for stabilization during reloading.

The whole process for reloading is I believe almost like changing the engine from a MBT, steps I believe as follow:

1.Remove all electrical couplings and maybe even hydraulic couplings from the tubes.

2.Remove all mechanical coupling from the tubes.

3.Hookup the steel cable to the tubes.(1 by 1 or four at a go)

4.Move the resupply veh to the side of the lanuchers and lower the stabiliser stand to the ground.

5. Using the crane, hookup to the steel cable and remove the empty tubes.This must be done slow to prevent accident.Afterall it is damn big!

6. Repeat step 1-5 but in the reverse order to place the new tubes with rockets.

As you can see , the whole process should take at least 45mins to more than one hour.

CHARGE!!!

rancour5 SG

what i dont understand is if what you say is true and that MLRS system is useless, why is Singapore looking into acquiring MLRS?? R we jealous of other countries having it 1st?

Also looking at the Primus 1st hand. i realise there are some weak links in the chain..but i wont elaborate since it is a known problem also.

gary1910 SG

Have you read thru all the posting in this thread, at range below 40km, a gun arty is better than a rocket in term of cost, accuracy, reliability & efficiency.

At range above 40 km, which some gun arty could not reach but rockets could. But a LR unguided rockets like Astros 2 has poor accuracy( 1-1.5% CEP) i.e. has no tactical value.

Unless you are talking abt the latest GPS guidance LR rockets, then is worthwhile to have.

SAF is smart to wait for this latest trend to mature before getting a rockets system.

CHARGE!!!

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

What I say is true, what I have been trying to point out for a long time already is that MLRS has it's place in the arty battle, but it's hardly any war winning weapon with mythical capabilities as paper Tyger would like to have us believe.

MLRS systems have several severe drawbacks namely slow reload times and heavier logistical burderns to keep it in the fight. Malaysia ASTROS II system may be able to deal out firepower but the seneriao where many malaysian forumers seem to keep in their demented fantasies of their MLRS being able to smite Singapore and her armed forces with impunity is prehaps not a little simplistic. As many have pointed out, the ASTROS is far from a wonder weapon.

MLRS has it's time and place. While capable of serious firepower, many other issues such as reloading, avoiding counter battery, and avoid getting blow to bits to boot. In terms of system vulnerabilities, MLRS systems are far more fragile then normal pieces. You can't just buy MLRS piecemeal and shoot a few rounds into the sea and think you have even a slightly credible rocket arty ability. If you don't have what it takes to upkeep an MLRS, and the upkeep is very heavy, all you have is a multimillion dollar one shot white elephant.

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

Originally posted by gary1910:

Have you read thru all the posting in this thread, at range below 40km, a gun arty is better than a rocket in term of cost, accuracy, reliability & efficiency.

At range above 40 km, which some gun arty could not reach but rockets could. But a LR unguided rockets like Astros 2 has poor accuracy( 1-1.5% CEP) i.e. has no tactical value.

Unless you are talking abt the latest GPS guidance LR rockets, then is worthwhile to have.

SAF is smart to wait for this latest trend to mature before getting a rockets system.

[b]CHARGE!!!

[/b]

As the lightest SP gun in the world, the Primus has in effect lower range and ammo capacity then other heavier SPs. This supposedly inherent design "defiency" is more deliberate and calaculated. We had created the Primus to suit our own needs as a near frontline arty support piece placing emphasis on unit protection, precision and running high mobility arty operations, to literally shoot and scoot to a whole new level and intensity.

The longer ranged battles will be handled by our older, and non SP pieces like the Fh2000. The Primus will be many, many times more useful in providing arty support to highly mobile forces.

In short any enemy has a potential nightmare arty battle to fight with Sg, they are all recieving precise fire and their attentions are split between trying to supress the Primus fire, or those from our less mobile guns.

In short, the ASTROS II was never any system to match up to the disparity between MAF and SAF arty, it will be more useful, and probably used more as a terror weapon fired in the general south (unless they have some war on Orang Utans in their own jungles) in hopes of hitting something Singaporean, military or not. Unless the MAF gets some guided rockets, the ASTROS II remains a white elephant with more terror, then tatical use.

[email protected] SG

I feel that without a very effective intelligence system, the MRLS are pretty useless. So a very good communications system is very important. Anyway there arent many pieces in service so they wont pose much of a threat. The enemy would have to first discover our force moving through the thick jungles. Then they will have to decide if its REALLY worth firing the rockets at the target. Then they would need adequate air defense at the MRLS location...

So basically... if our forces just move quickly and carefully, they shouldnt be discovered too often. Jamming communications would help delay info. transmitted to the artillery pieces. with this methods, i think troops shouldnt suffer too many casualties to MRLS fire.

spencer99 SG

If the SAF is on the offensive, we will need to "attack" MAF objectives held by the MAF. Attacking and overrunning the preivously MAF-held objectives, we will be exposed to pre-determined defensive fire that the MAF would obviously have planned.

No point just walking around in the jungle right??

[email protected] SG

hmm... i didnt exactly mean for the troops to "walk" in the jungle. I meant to use the cover of the jungle to advance forward quickly so as to reduce being spotted by the enemy and to reach the objective asap.

Obviously the MAF will expect an attack on an important target.... so it will have to be up to our RPVs .. scouts .. aircraft to find and neutralize them.

Fairyland SG

You seem to think that RPVs can find target easy......

Well that's not really true especially in jungle terrain even with thermal imagers!

With NFOV cameras, the RPVs is better at watching over a small area or axis of movement.

You want to search bigger areas you need panoramic cameras OR better still SAR.

SAR equipped Heron (hee hee) maybe better suited for the job.

YourFather SG

NO TACTICAL VALUE???

errr, I guess you should ask the Iraqis who have survived an MLRS rocket attack what they feel first before making that kind of statement. No offence, but that statement stinks of sourgrapes. I may have some doubts about the ICM payload's effectiveness in forested areas, and even about its dud rate (if you read the "lessons learned" report from the divisions which participated in OIF, you'd understand), but never discount its fearsome firepower, even at ranges above 40km. They can still place massive firepower at a target further than that. What I feel is, how many rockets will be needed? Definitely much more, and it may not be economical on the logistics supply chain. But dont make it sound as if it CANT HIT YOU FROM MORE THAN 40KM.

What I feel may be the REAL archilles heel in their 'system' is their target acquisition capability. Are they able to acquire their target, track it long enough, and pass the information efficiently enough to the ASTROS II? How capable is their arty fire control system?

rancour5 SG

That is precisely the point i was trying to put across..that we should not discount the MLRS threat. Regarding Gun arty verus MLRS..i do not think it is an issue since they are complementary and each serves a different purpose anyway.

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

What gary said is correct. The reason those Iraqi's were pummeled was generally because their exact location was known, in the desert (no cover) were generally poorly organized (bunched together and hence tended to get wiped out in one hit), non moving, and generally had no way of striking back (hence the Americans could just camp there and fire away with impunity without have to shoot and scoot.)

At 89km, the ASTROS II is nothing more then an area weapon, where it would probably hit everything BUT the target. Which would most likely turn out to be civilian targets and the like. Given the urban nature of fighting future combat here, those long range ASTROS II commanders will end up fragging an awful lot of civillians on both sides if they decide to fire from extreme range. Imagine submunitions falling over one map grid square of JB. More likely their civvies will sustain more damage then actual military hard targets (though an SM1 tank isn't exactly hard).

Yes the ASTROS II can hit stuff beyond 40 clicks, but it's accuracy is such that tatically it is for all pratical reasons, pretty usless. Maybe unless they want to use it as some form of poor man's WMD.

Hence forth, to be really effective, more tatically useful and less hedious, they will have to move their ASTROS an awful lot closer and far more vulnerable.

Unless SAF really screws up like the Iraqi army in responding to the MLRS, to expect a stellar preformance from a one-shot, slow reloading system like the ASTROS II is pretty optimistic on the malaysian side. Maybe the assume anything fired south would hit something of tatical value?

As said, Sg is better off, and probably is, waiting for guided rocket technology to mature before buying those expensive-butt systems to show off.

The truth is, in terms of equipment-parity, the Malaysians are always on the losing end when it comes to getting new hardware to top Singapore. This is because they usually have to spend tons of $$$ on stuff just to match up. or slightly suceed Singapore's headstart, and all Singapore has to do is to camp out, wait for new technologies to cheapen and mature before leapfrogging ahead once again. Unless they want to turn a inordinate amount of their GDP towards defence to superceed the SAF, diplomancy and rethoric has always been their forte, and avenue of choice. As long as the Malaysians have enough guns to make sure Singaporean victory can never be bloodless, and Singaporean has enough military advantage over Malaysian to rein them in, the balance of power is preserved.

gary1910 SG

I think ST has answer for me quite clearly, let me some give example, If the Astros 2 were to fire toward the SG to disable our airfields at range of 80km , the probability of hitting civilian targets is extremely high which mean int'l outcry against the use and yet might not able to achieve it military objectives.

If MY is invaded, for example a coy of troop just outside the outskirt of a MY town , this time it might hit a MY town rather the coy of enemy troops.

And becos of the reloading recapability of Astros 2, they will have to quickly scoot and avoid been targeted by arty fire, I sure by then SAF will send in UAVs, Attack helos and even a bn of soldiers to hunt them down.

CHARGE!!!

observe SG

The Russian Smerch system also have to be manually loaded aided by crane ...and it must be done tube by tube.

Even so, it takes only 36mins to reload. There are 12 tubes to be reploaded...so about 3min per tube on average. See the loading is done from the back.

http://arms.ashst.com/artillery/smerch.htm

The Astros 2 rockets are loaded in one go coz the rockets comes in the container that houses the rockets.
The loading is done at the side.
I would put the reloading process as being much, much faster compared to the russians....perhaps about 6mins.

I don't consider that slow.

BTW, 1 300mm rocket can deliver tens of submunition. The blast from the submunitions can blanket 1 sqkm.
With that type of coverage, what's a few metres ?

The Brazillians are not that backward afterall, i would think the accuracy of their system would be somewhat closer to the Russian's Smerch at 0.3%.
The buyers like Iraq (inthe 80s), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, certainly can afford and have access to other MLRS system from the Russia, US or even China. They have chosen the Brazillian system.
As for system from China...well mostly sold to banana republics in Africa....so don't compared them with the Brazillians.
[/url]

« Previous Page Next Page »