ATACMS to Ukraine? During the early stages [https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/03/can-russia-salvage-its-special-military-operation-disaster-in-ukraine/] of the Russian invasion of Ukraine [https://www.euronews.com/2023/01/30/ukraine-war-a-month-by-month-timeline-of-the-conflict-in-2022], Ukrainian President Zelensky [https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/12/volodymyr-zelensky-is-unstoppable/] specifically cited Multiple Launch Rocket Systems [https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/us-long-range-rockets-ukraine-mlrs/index.html] as among the key weapons systems his forces would need to stop Russian attackers. This makes sense, in the absence of having air superiority [https://www.airandspaceforces.com/airpower-ukraine-air-superiority-hecker/], the only way to slow down, intercept, or simply stop Russian long-range rocket attacks on civilian areas would be to destroy the launchers. Russian rocket launchers, however, can fire ground rockets from distances of several hundred miles with mobile launchers, therefore attacking from standoff distances beyond the range of traditional 155mm artillery [https://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/peo-ammo-lw155/]. Most standard 155mm artillery rounds can reach ranges of about 30km, well short of the range needed to destroy Russian rocket launchers [https://warriormaven.com/russia-ukraine/polish-mig-29s-headed-to-ukraine-can-ukraine-achieve-air-superiority]. Without air superiority and the ability to destroy the Russian launchers [https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-ukraine-fought-against-russias-air-war] from the air, Ukrainian forces and communities are without sufficient defense against frequent, indiscriminate rocket attacks on their neighborhoods and cities. Although Ukraine had access to satellite imagery, NATO drone [https://www.newsweek.com/nato-may-ramp-black-sea-presence-after-us-drone-downed-ex-general-1787777] and Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance (ISR) assets, and other opportunities to “see” or “find” Russian launchers, they simply have had no ability to attack and destroy them without air superiority. All of these circumstances helped welcome the eventual arrival of Western Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Sgystems (GMLRS [https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/11/lockheed-martin-awarded-new-contract-to-replenish-gmlrs-stockpiles/]) to Ukraine and completely change the scope and momentum [https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/03/06/ukraine-guided-artillery-himars/] of the war. The Guided artillery enables Ukraine to destroy Russian launchers, troop concentrations, and weapons from more than twice the range [https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-is-using-guided-rockets-with-more-range-than-himars-launched-ones] of standard artillery. Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems, which are GPS-precision guided, help the Ukrainians slow, stop, and even destroy advancing Russian units and even enable some successful counteroffensives. Most MLRS and GMLRS can travel more than 80km to destroy targets, but HIMARS and other rockets in Ukraine can reach even farther. ATACMS TO UKRAINE? What about Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMs [https://www.19fortyfive.com/2023/03/atacms-the-long-range-missiles-ukraine-wants-to-fight-russia/])? The MGM-140 [https://eurasiantimes.com/ukraine-confident-of-acquiring-forbidden-atacms-from-the-us/] Army Tactical Missile Systems are also ground-fired rockets, yet they can travel up to 200 miles to destroy a target. Why not make sure ATACMs reach Ukraine as well? This would seem pretty critical to ensure continued defense against Russian rocket attacks and possibly support larger Ukrainian incursions [https://warriormaven.com/russia-ukraine/can-the-russia-ukraine-war-be-won-anytime-soon] into previously held Russian territory by softening or destroying defenses. Thus far, public reports have said the Pentagon has been reluctant to send ATACMs, saying the Ukrainians have what they need in this area. Do they? Certainly, the Pentagon may be concerned about possible escalation [https://warriormaven.com/russia-ukraine/su-57-5th-generation-stealth-fighter-ukraine-f-35] should Ukrainian weapons hit deep within Russian territory, yet the weapons are advantageous for Ukraine in a purely tactical sense. A longstanding armament in the Army inventory, ATACMS have been upgraded over the years with new software, guidance systems, and command and control. Military-today.com [http://military-today.com/] explains ATACMs as “quasi-ballistic” maneuvering missile, which deviates from a standard ballistic “arc” in trajectory to perform rapid turns and course corrections on the way to targets. Attack Robots, Autonomous Weapons, Drones & the Future of AI “This is a deliberate function of the ATACMS, as this seemingly erratic flight behavior makes it exceptionally difficult to track or intercept. This class of weapon is thus widely referred to as a ‘quasi-ballistic missile,’ though the U.S. Army has also referred to the ATACMS as a ‘maneuvering missile,’” the military-today essay states. [http://www.military-today.com/missiles/atacms.htm] ATACMS can fire with several different kinds of warheads, one of which is anti-personnel submunitions, which disperse or scatter in mid-air to widen destruction and potentially hit pockets of enemy fighters on the move or blanket an area with explosives. “Depending on how far from the target the missile is set to release its submunitions, they can potentially saturate an area of up to 33 000 m2, with each submunition having a casualty radius of 15,” the report explains. Also, along with another submunition variant, the ATACMs fire a unitary warhead designed to increase precision and direct “point” of damage while reducing collateral damage. ATACMs were fired in the Gulf War [https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/06/a-history-of-the-first-gulf-war/] in the early 1990s and also fired extensively in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom. More than 500 ATACMS have been fired in combat. Kris Osborn [https://warriormaven.com/author/krisosborn] is the Military Affairs Editor of 19FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
