Top 10 Multiple Launch Rocket Systems | Best MLRS in the World 

Even the name is wrong: should be multiple rocket launch system. Else, how do you launch a rocket multiple times? What is this, a falcon 9?

This channels quality has seriously degraded...

​@@Phil858 the name is correct, it is an "MLRS" NOT "MRLS". You are the wrong one

Its an AI channel

Man dosnt get the joke​@@tomokazu2235

The video is from an American, what do you expect?

Its bigger and a bit heavier than M270. But unlike M270, its unarmored and uses wheels instead of tracks. And unlike HIMARS, its not mobile enough. HIMARS on the other hand can be deployed quickly to the front lines as it is light enough to be carried by a C-130 Hercules, which also don't need a runway to takeoff and land. One would need a proper airfield and heavier aircraft to transport both M270 and K239 Chunmoo. So in terms of mobility, US M142 HIMARS and Brazil's Astros II tops. Another thing to add M270 is not manufactured by the US alone but also by France, Germany, and Italy. But lightweight MLRS and heavyweight MLRS should be separated not like this video.

@@johnsilver9338 So you should update your data about Chunmoo. Poland ordered Chunmoo and it will be build on armored Polish Jelcz trucks.

@@albertkowalski5629 What that has got to do with anything I said?

You are right. The MLRS system means nothing to be launched unconditionally. It is very important to reach the correct distance and target quickly. Safety is very important when handling, and the speed of how the shell is replaced after launch is also important. What's the point without automation? The price is also important. South Korea's MLRS system has already been exported to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Poland.

?

no 120 km not miles

@@evangus Yeah like chinese right?

@@evangus O Astros II era temido pelos norte americanos, deixavam muitas baixas do lado americano. Havia planos especiais para neutralizar os Astros II na guerra do golfo, então, armas Brasileiras são ruins?

And it's certainly much better than Pinaka or Huragan

Elbit's Puls should be within top 3

Thats LYNX. Upgrade it and you get PULS.

Nowhere, he just made it up

What is the MLRS called? WOW!! Do they come with 100,000 rockets per system? Congrats!!

The answer to this is quite simple There was no M-242 HIMARS in 1982 Astros II is the father of HIMARS and HIMARS is the son of Astros II At that time, the only multiple rocket system that the United States and Allies had was the M-278 and a few others that were not considered the players at that time. HIMARS only came into existence centuries later in 2005 through examples of the Astros II captured by the United States and England during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The countries that acquired Astros II, among others, know that Astros II is unique, in addition to, of course, its political geopolitical advantages Today, to break this barrier, the United States sent HIMARS to Ukraine, marketing Brazil could send Astros II but Brazil's geopolitical position would not be favorable until then

Nope. Russian MLRS lack versatility and mobility. NATO MLRS have different rockets for different ranges. For example, M142 HIMARS have the same dimensions and weight category of BM-21 Grad, but can fire rockets equivalent to Iskander's range and even more. It can be quickly deployed to the front lines as it can be transported by C-130 Hercules which don't need an airstrip to take-off and land. The only lightweight MLRS with the same versatility in terms of rocket range is Brazil's Astros II. Russia don't have anything equivalent. An armored version with twice the payload and uses tracks which is perfect for rugged terrain is US M270 and European MARS II. Again Russia don't have an armored tracked MLRS with the same versatility.

@johnsilver9338 il-76 doest need runways either. America vehicles get stuck in the mud, tons of videos right here on RU-vid showing that they cannot go right to the front line. China could cut off the part supply to HIMARS anytime. American/NATO production is so slow!!!! The equipment is finicky and maintenance intensive. Service readiness rates are very low compared with Russian equipment. American junk is being destroyed in Ukraine much faster than it could be replaced by factories!!!

@@matthewlewis-zw3tf Yet Russia lost 1200 tanks. 🤣👍

@@matthewlewis-zw3tf Also US produced 5 times more F-35s than J-20 in the same time. While also being more advanced.

@@matthewlewis-zw3tf China don't have a hand in the production of any NATO equipment. Its the other way around as China needs US chips for both miltary and civilan use.

Unless GPS is jammed.

It’s basically exactly the same the only change it’s the vehicle wheels that’s it 😂😂😂.

it is better only on paper

@@RubbittTheBruise It has INS for backup.

Not anymore. maybe 10 years ago this was true, but now it's not the best anymore. The new Chinese A300 and WS-2D are the best MLRS today: more range and more capabilities than any other

Chunmoo is bigger and a bit heavier than M270. Same with Israel's PULS. But unlike M270, both Chunmoo and PULS are unarmored and uses wheels instead of tracks. However in terms of mobility, US M142 HIMARS and Brazil's Astros II tops. Both HIMARS and Astros can be deployed quickly to the front lines as it is light enough to be carried by a C-130 Hercules, which also don't need a runway to takeoff and land. One would need a proper airfield and heavier aircraft to transport M270, K239 Chunmoo, and PULS. But lightweight MLRS and heavyweight MLRS should be separated not like this video.

@@johnsilver9338 but chunmoo very cheap

@@gzs8647 Not very cheap. Chunmoo is around 3M while M270 is 4M.

In terms of characteristics, the M14 is worse than the M270, not to mention the “Tornado-S” of Russia. Secondly, in any Western statistics he is in 5th-6th place and no further.

GMLRS (HIMARS) missiles were also shot down by the Pantsir system in Ukraine - there is a video of dismantling the wreckage of this missile lol.

Lol I agree 😅

BM21 is very limited by only short range rocket launcher (40 km only). It is literally useless for any long-range combat mission. It doesn't matter if it's the most produced and most used rocket launcher, the numbers don't make it a better system. It's still very limited in range and capabilities.

it is better only on paper