Artillery strikes are playing a crucial role in Russia’s war in Ukraine in what top American commanders have called a “battle of fires”.
Russia’s military initially had a significant advantage over the Ukrainian armed forces because of a much larger arsenal of artillery systems.
It meant they were able to devastate Ukrainian positions in the east, while staying out of the range of Ukrainian weapons.
The United Kingdom, United States and belatedly Germany have worked to tip the balance of firepower on the battlefield in favour of Ukraine by giving their allies artillery systems that not only have a longer range than the Russians but fire with greater accuracy.
This includes arming Ukrainian troops with multiple-launch rocket systems or MLRS.
MLRS stands for “Multiple-Launch Rocket System”, a mobile rocket artillery system that fires multiple surface-to-surface missiles.
The British Army’s Royal Artillery uses the M270 rocket system.
Advertisement
Operated by a crew of three (driver, gunner and section chief), the weapon is a highly-mobile, automatic system that can fire 12 surface-to-surface precision-guided missiles in less than a minute. They can be fired individually or in pairs of two up to 12.
The M31 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) munitions, with a 200lb high explosive warhead, can hit a target more than 50 miles away – twice the range of other artillery systems used by the army.
A programme is underway to extend the reach even further.
A fire control computer ensures accuracy is maintained by re-aiming the launcher between rounds.
The M270 MLRS was developed under a US-led programme that saw the first systems come into service in the 1980s.
The UK first used its MLRS during the First Gulf War
Image: Sky News is the first to be granted permission to film a multiple-launch rocket system given to Ukraine by the UK
What has the UK given to Ukraine to bolster its firepower?
The UK has given a total of six MLRS to Ukraine, as well as precision guided M31A1 missiles.
The first tranche of three was announced in June 2022, with Defence Secretary Ben Wallace saying the system would “help the country defend itself against Russian aggression”.
A new commitment to double the UK’s contribution was made two months later.
The UK MLRS and a similar artillery system provided to Ukraine by the US, called the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), have a longer range, much better precision and a faster rate of fire compared with Soviet-designed Smerch, Uragan and Tornado multiple rocket launchers used by both Russia and Ukraine.
Germany has given the Ukrainians its version – MARS II rocket launchers as well as hundreds of rockets.
It means that Ukrainian troops are able to hit Russian positions – including armoured vehicles, military bases, command posts and ammunition stores – with accuracy and with a reduced risk of being struck in Russian return fire.
The Russian military is forced to use large numbers of rounds against a target to compensate for a lack of precision with their weapons.
The UK M31A1 missiles have been designed to defend against Russian heavy artillery and the MLRS’s range of more than 50 miles allows Ukraine to strike beyond Russian lines, while also putting it out of reach of most Russian artillery systems.
Western leaders have so far have refrained from providing Ukraine with even longer-range missiles for launchers that can reach targets up to 186 miles, allowing the military to hit areas deep inside Russian territory.
Does Russia have MLRS?
Russia has its own multiple launch rocket system: the 9K58 Smerch 300mm MLRS. It fires the 300mm 9M55K rocket and has a range of between 12 and 43 miles.
Smerch was developed in the early 1980s and entered service with the Russian Army in 1988.
It is also used by the militaries of India, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus and Ukraine, and was exported to Kuwait and Algeria.
What is the difference between MLRS and HIMARS?
HIMARS can fire the same family of munitions as MLRS launchers but with one key difference: a wheeled chassis instead of tracks.
The tracks on the MLRS make the system highly mobile, with a max speed of 40mph.
This means the launchers are hard for the enemy to spot and can quickly change position after firing to escape airstrikes, in what has become known as a “shoot and scoot” strategy.
What are the disadvantages of MLRS?
Ukraine says the number of rocket launcher systems being provided by Western leaders is still far too small.
In June, Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukraine’s president, said the country needs at least 300 MLRS, 1,000 heavy howitzers, 500 tanks and 2,000 armoured vehicles – much more than the West has provided.
The court ruled to uphold the impeachment saying the conservative leader “violated his duty as commander-in-chief by mobilising troops” when he declared martial law.
The president was also said to have taken actions “beyond the powers provided in the constitution”.
Image: Demonstrators stayed overnight near the constitutional court. Pic: AP
Supporters and opponents of the president gathered in their thousands in central Seoul as they awaited the ruling.
The 64-year-old shocked MPs, the public and international allies in early December when he declared martial law, meaning all existing laws regarding civilians were suspended in place of military law.
Image: The court was under heavy police security guard ahead of the announcement. Pic: AP
After suddenly declaring martial law, Mr Yoon sent hundreds of soldiers and police officers to the National Assembly.
He has argued that he sought to maintain order, but some senior military and police officers sent there have told hearings and investigators that Mr Yoon ordered them to drag out politicians to prevent an assembly vote on his decree.
His presidential powers were suspended when the opposition-dominated assembly voted to impeach him on 14 December, accusing him of rebellion.
The unanimous verdict to uphold parliament’s impeachment and remove Mr Yoon from office required the support of at least six of the court’s eight justices.
South Korea must hold a national election within two months to find a new leader.
Lee Jae-myung, leader of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, is the early favourite to become the country’s next president, according to surveys.
While the UK’s FTSE 100 closed down 1.55% and the continent’s STOXX Europe 600 index was down 2.67% as of 5.30pm, it was American traders who were hit the most.
All three of the US’s major markets opened to sharp losses on Thursday morning.
Image: The S&P 500 is set for its worst day of trading since the COVID-19 pandemic. File pic: AP
By 8.30pm UK time (3.30pm EST), The Dow Jones Industrial Average was down 3.7%, the S&P 500 opened with a drop of 4.4%, and the Nasdaq composite was down 5.6%.
Compared to their values when Donald Trump was inaugurated, the three markets were down around 5.6%, 8.7% and 14.4%, respectively, according to LSEG.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
Worst one-day losses since COVID
As Wall Street trading ended at 9pm in the UK, two indexes had suffered their worst one-day losses since the COVID-19 pandemic.
The S&P 500 fell 4.85%, the Nasdaq dropped 6%, and the Dow Jones fell 4%.
It marks Nasdaq’s biggest daily percentage drop since March 2020 at the start of COVID, and the largest drop for the Dow Jones since June 2020.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:07
The latest numbers on tariffs
‘Trust in President Trump’
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN earlier in the day that Mr Trump was “doubling down on his proven economic formula from his first term”.
“To anyone on Wall Street this morning, I would say trust in President Trump,” she told the broadcaster, adding: “This is indeed a national emergency… and it’s about time we have a president who actually does something about it.”
Later, the US president told reporters as he left the White House that “I think it’s going very well,” adding: “The markets are going to boom, the stock is going to boom, the country is going to boom.”
He later said on Air Force One that the UK is “happy” with its tariff – the lowest possible levy of 10% – and added he would be open to negotiations if other countries “offer something phenomenal”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:27
How is the world reacting to Trump’s tariffs?
Economist warns of ‘spiral of doom’
The turbulence in the markets from Mr Trump’s tariffs “just left everybody in shock”, Garrett Melson, portfolio strategist at Natixis Investment Managers Solutions in Boston, told Reuters.
He added that the economy could go into recession as a result, saying that “a lot of the pain, will probably most acutely be felt in the US and that certainly would weigh on broader global growth as well”.
Meanwhile, chief investment officer at St James’s Place Justin Onuekwusi said that international retaliation is likely, even as “it’s clear countries will think about how to retaliate in a politically astute way”.
He warned: “Significant retaliation could lead to a tariff ‘spiral of doom’ that could be the growth shock that drags us into recession.”
It comes as the UK government published a long list of US products that could be subject to reciprocal tariffs – including golf clubs and golf balls.
Running to more than 400 pages, the list is part of a four-week-long consultation with British businesses and suggests whiskey, jeans, livestock, and chemical components.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said on Thursday that the US president had launched a “new era” for global trade and that the UK will respond with “cool and calm heads”.
It also comes as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced a 25% tariff on all American-imported vehicles that are not compliant with the US-Mexico-Canada trade deal.
He added: “The 80-year period when the United States embraced the mantle of global economic leadership, when it forged alliances rooted in trust and mutual respect and championed the free and open exchange of goods and services, is over. This is a tragedy.”
Donald Trump has announced a 10% trade tariff on all imports from the UK – as he unleashed sweeping tariffs across the globe.
Speaking at a White House event entitled “Make America Wealthy Again”, the president held up a chart detailing the worst offenders – which also showed the new tariffs the US would be imposing.
“This is Liberation Day,” he told a cheering audience of supporters, while hitting out at foreign “cheaters”.
He claimed “trillions” of dollars from the “reciprocal” levies he was imposing on others’ trade barriers would provide relief for the US taxpayer and restore US jobs and factories.
Mr Trump said the US has been “looted, pillaged, raped, plundered” by other nations.
Image: Pic: AP
His first tariff announcement was a 25% duty on all car imports from midnight – 5am on Thursday, UK time.
Mr Trump confirmed the European Union would face a 20% reciprocal tariff on all other imports. China’s rate was set at 34%.
The UK’s rate of 10% was perhaps a shot across the bows over the country’s 20% VAT rate, though the president’s board suggested a 10% tariff imbalance between the two nations.
It was also confirmed that further US tariffs were planned on some individual sectors including semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and critical mineral imports.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
6:39
Trump’s tariffs explained
The ramping up of duties promises to be painful for the global economy. Tariffs on steel and aluminium are already in effect.
The UK government signalled there would be no immediate retaliation.
Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: “We will always act in the best interests of UK businesses and consumers. That’s why, throughout the last few weeks, the government has been fully focused on negotiating an economic deal with the United States that strengthens our existing fair and balanced trading relationship.
“The US is our closest ally, so our approach is to remain calm and committed to doing this deal, which we hope will mitigate the impact of what has been announced today.
“We have a range of tools at our disposal and we will not hesitate to act. We will continue to engage with UK businesses including on their assessment of the impact of any further steps we take.
“Nobody wants a trade war and our intention remains to secure a deal. But nothing is off the table and the government will do everything necessary to defend the UK’s national interest.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:43
Who showed up for Trump’s tariff address?
The EU has pledged to retaliate, which is a problem for Northern Ireland.
Should that scenario play out, the region faces the prospect of rising prices because all its imports are tied to EU rules under post-Brexit trading arrangements.
It means US goods shipped to Northern Ireland would be subject to the EU’s reprisals.
The impact of a trade war would be expected to be widely negative, with tit-for-tat tariffs risking job losses, a ramping up of prices and cooling of global trade.
Research for the Institute for Public Policy Research has suggested more than 25,000 direct jobs in the UK car manufacturing industry alone could be at risk from the tariffs on car exports to the US.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) had said the tariff costs could not be absorbed by manufacturers and may lead to a review of output.
The tariffs now on UK exports pose a big risk to growth and the so-called headroom Chancellor Rachel Reeves was forced to restore to the public finances at the spring statement, risking further spending cuts or tax rises ahead to meet her fiscal rules.
A member of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), David Miles, told MPs on Tuesday that US tariffs at 20% or 25% maintained on the UK for five years would “knock out all the headroom the government currently has”.
But he added that a “very limited tariff war” that the UK stays out of could be “mildly positive”.
He said: “There’s a bit of trade that will get diverted to the UK, and some of the exports from China, for example, that would have gone to the US, they’ll be looking for a home for them in the rest of the world.
“And stuff would be available in the UK a bit cheaper than otherwise would have been. So there is one, not central scenario at all, which is very, very mildly potentially positive to the UK. All the other ones which involve the UK facing tariffs are negative, and they’re negative to very different extents.”