THEN & NOW
“Tests like these make sure that the missile and the launcher communicate, and the software is working properly,” said Mia Fitch, test officer with the WSMR Materiel Test Directorate. By identifying weapons that are still in good working order and able to be deployed, the Army saves money on disposal and replacement of the older missiles and improves readiness by certi- fying that the weapons could still be used in a future operation.
TIME WILL TELL
The ATACMS, which replaced the Lance Missile System, was first deployed during Operation Desert Storm, but its development origins date back to the Cold War. (Photo courtesy of WSMR)
both point and area high-value targets with precision fires out to 300 kilometers,” Ames said. “Te limitations of ATACMS include range and volume of fire, which are insufficient to meet evolving opera- tional requirements.”
Since entering service with the Army, ATACMS has undergone several upgrades and improvements to enhance its capabil- ities and maintain its relevance on the modern battlefield. It has seen opera- tional use in various conflicts, including the Persian Gulf War, and in Afghanistan, Iraq and Eastern Europe.
THIS IS JUST A TEST PrSM was produced and delivered on an accelerated timeline for the Army’s long- range precision fires priority, but a full transition from ATACMS won’t happen overnight.
Rather than scrapping all ATACMS artil- lery, the older weapons were carefully
assessed and tested while the new PrSM system was being developed and inte- grated, to determine their continued viability and to ensure that existing assets were used effectively. Tis allowed for a seamless transition, leveraging the strengths of proven technology while embracing the advancements offered by PrSM to enhance military capabilities.
On Dec. 14, 2021, a stockpile reliabil- ity test of early ATACMS versions was conducted by Soldiers from the 3rd Battal- ion, 321st Field Artillery Regiment, 18th Field Artillery Brigade at the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) in New Mexico.
According to WSMR Public Affairs, during these tests, older missiles are pulled out of inventory and fired. Te shots are then evaluated, and if the missiles can still perform to Army specifications, they can inform the Army about the longevity of other missiles in the same stock from the same production run.
“[Tese missiles] are already past their prime, so we need to make sure they are still reliable, they still work, and they have the impact pattern and can reach the distances we need so we can still use them,” Fitch said. Lockheed Martin engi- neers who supported the test noted that the missiles represented some of the oldest ATACMS missiles still in the Army’s inventory—manufactured over 30 years ago, making them older than most of the Soldiers operating the launcher vehicle.
LAUNCHING A STRIKE Following a development process completed in a compressed timeframe and marked by rigorous research and testing, PrSM has now taken center stage, poised to revolutionize the battlefield. Engineers, scientists and industry partners collabo- rated closely to refine concepts and address challenges to achieve seamless perfor- mance, reliability and compatibility and to ensure PrSM emerged as a formidable successor to ATACMS.
Te transition from ATACMS to PrSM is part of the Army’s broader moderniza- tion effort aimed at equipping Soldiers with cutting-edge weapon systems to address evolving threats and operational requirements. The PrSM’s advanced features align with the Army’s future oper- ational concepts and strategic priorities, making it a crucial component of force modernization.
https://asc.ar my.mil 141
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
