After the implementation of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the U.S. military has had a moment of reflection. Instead of looking to others, their reference point is now their own history.
In the past, the U.S. military led the trend in high-tech weaponry, and others could only follow suit, often referred to as “crossing the river by feeling the stones following the U.S. military.” However, this situation has quietly changed. In some areas, the PLA has surpassed the U.S. military, becoming the one being pursued. This scenario has played out again in the field of mobile anti-tank missiles.
According to U.S. media reports, the U.S. Army is planning to equip existing high-mobility tactical vehicles (JLTV) and Infantry Squad Vehicles (ISV) with non-line-of-sight (NLOS) long-range missiles to enhance the anti-tank capabilities of Infantry Brigade Combat Teams (BCT). Some might think this resembles the concept of the Red Arrow 20/50 long-range multi-purpose missile unveiled by the PLA last year. Is the U.S. military now borrowing ideas from the PLA?
As soon as the PLA unveiled the Red Arrow 20/50 long-range multi-purpose missile, the U.S. Army proposed the idea of equipping non-line-of-sight long-range missiles. It seems peculiar, but tracing back, the concept of Red Arrow 20/50 is not unique to the PLA; it originated from the U.S. Army’s Future Combat Systems (FCS) in the 2000s, specifically the Non-Line-Of-Sight (NLOS) weapon system.
The Non-Line-Of-Sight weapon system also has a common name – the Net Fire Missile. The core idea of the Net Fire concept is to enhance the precision of mobile firepower support systems and expand the use of lightweight tactical missiles. The Net Fire system can both directly target and replace the functions of anti-tank missiles, as well as attack targets beyond the horizon, replacing some functions of artillery. This lightweight precision strike system provides commanders with remote, precise, and high-value target capabilities.
However, the Net Fire system faced technical challenges during development, coupled with high costs. Like many projects in the Future Combat Systems, it was discontinued in 2010. The discontinuation of Net Fire does not imply flaws in the design concept; it was, in fact, a groundbreaking weapon idea, offering frontline forces a versatile, adaptable, and long-range precision strike capability.
The PLA and related units are also very interested in the Net Fire system. We believe it will be a valuable support missile weapon in the composite brigade combat system. In fact, the Red Arrow-10 self-propelled anti-tank missile system, to some extent, already possesses characteristics of a non-line-of-sight weapon system. Through fiber-optic guidance mode, the missile can hit most fortified targets within 10 kilometers, breaking free from the constraints of anti-tank missiles that can only target 2-5 kilometers away.
However, the range of 10 kilometers is still insufficient. The Red Arrow-10 is essentially an expanded-use heavy anti-tank missile system, with less than ideal adaptability, requiring a dedicated chassis and lacking emphasis on modularity. With the deepening of informationization and digitization in the army and the successful construction of the Beidou Global Satellite Navigation System, the PLA has cleared obstacles for further development of non-line-of-sight systems, especially achieving a solid foundation for developing strike capabilities beyond 20 kilometers.
After relentless efforts by technical personnel, we successfully developed the CM501 series missile weapon system, subsequently developing the Red Arrow 20/50 missile. This is a domestically produced multi-purpose tactical precision strike system. The missile can be vertically launched and installed on lightweight platforms. The basic Red Arrow 20 model has a range of over 25 kilometers, capable of long-range strikes against tanks, fixed firepower points, self-propelled artillery, tactical missiles, and other high-value targets. It can also strike various surface targets and even intercept low-altitude drones and armed helicopters, making it a versatile tool on the battlefield.
From the information at the Zhuhai Airshow, it is evident that we place great importance on the application of multi-purpose tactical precision strike systems in highly mobile units. The Red Arrow 50 has been installed on the third-generation armored Warrior high-mobility tactical vehicle. With a maximum range of 50 kilometers, this indicator means that the army’s highly mobile units can not only destroy the opponent’s most advanced main battle tanks from a distance but can also suppress the opponent’s artillery, with the range of most 155mm self-propelled howitzers being around 50 kilometers.
The Red Arrow 50 provides light infantry with deep-strike capabilities, without entirely relying on constant support from air and artillery units. For example, in high-altitude operations, the Red Arrow 50 can effectively suppress the Indian Army’s K9 self-propelled howitzer and Pinaka rocket launcher, both of whose main ammunition ranges do not exceed 50 kilometers. Imagine the PLA’s light infantry using the high mobility of the armored Warrior, launching Red Arrow 50 missiles in mountain valleys, crossing ridges to attack the Indian Army’s artillery positions in the rear, then relocating after the strike – a method that the Indian Army would find nearly impossible to counter.
While the PLA makes significant progress, the U.S. military, after a round of maneuvers, awkwardly discovers that its infantry brigade combat teams lack effective battlefield firepower support means. The U.S. military has been engaged in security operations in the early 21st century, neglecting complex army equipment for over a decade. The experiences from the Ukraine conflict show that heavy mechanized forces remain the primary means of military competition for major powers. Simultaneously, the widespread use of information systems such as drones and satellite networks has paved the way for ground forces to conduct beyond-line-of-sight strikes at over-the-horizon distances.
In other words, the Ukraine war validated the PLA’s predictions for future warfare, while the U.S. Army awkwardly finds itself without suitable weapons for future conflicts. The Net Fire system has been shelved for many years, and reactivating it is not realistic. Faced with the rapid transformation of the PLA Army, the pressure on the U.S. military is very real. The unique tendering system of the U.S. military also means that developing a self-designed non-line-of-sight weapon system will be a lengthy process. Therefore, the U.S. Army has decided to seek external assistance, opting for the Israeli Long Spike missile’s non-line-of-sight variant as a temporary solution, buying time for its own development of a similar weapon system.
The maximum range of the Long Spike NLOS missile is approximately 25 kilometers, about half of that of the Red Arrow 50 and equivalent to the Red Arrow 20. However, for the U.S. Army, it’s a pragmatic solution. Integrating it with existing Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV), a lightweight and highly mobile non-line-of-sight weapon system is born, minimizing cost, risk, and time.
It’s worth noting that this is not the first time the U.S. Army has introduced the Long Spike NLOS system. Previously, the U.S. Army Aviation had purchased a small quantity for testing, serving as a transitional solution before the successful development of the AGM-179 Joint Air-to-Ground Missile (JAGM).
Therefore, the U.S. Army is quite familiar with the Long Spike NLOS, and if approved, it will be installed vertically on both Joint Light Tactical Vehicles and Infantry Squad Vehicles (ISV). It will provide infantry brigade combat teams with long-range strike and anti-tank capabilities, while also handling certain anti-drone tasks.
In fact, this isn’t the first time the U.S. military has borrowed concepts from the PLA. After the mass deployment of Type 15 light tanks, the U.S. military felt the stimulus, accelerating its repeatedly tendered and discontinued light tank projects. Shortly after, the U.S. military selected the proposal from General Dynamics Land Systems, resulting in the M10 “Bucky” light tank.
From opening the era of global high-tech weapons to being compelled by the PLA to upgrade, and now relying on foreign missiles to overcome embarrassment, this development reflects a decline in U.S. national power, insufficient innovation, and a gradual loss of the ability to lead the global trend in high-tech weapon development—a significant challenge for the U.S. military, which relies on the superiority of its weaponry.
I think you mean M10 Booker, not Bucky