Details Emerge On Army’s Failed NLOS-LS Missile

In testimony before lawmakers yesterday, David Duma, OSD’s Principal Deputy Director for Operational Testing and Evaluation (OT&E), detailed failings of the Army’s Non-Line of Sight Launch System (NLOS-LS).

During the most recent tests carried out in February, new navigation software caused six of seven total system aborts. Overall missile reliability is just 61 percent, well below the 85 percent requirement. The missile’s problems appear to be with its infrared seeker; missiles using the IR seeker hit only 5 out of 11 times during tests last year and again this year.

During limited user tests in February, the first operational flight test of the NLOS-LS, only two of the Precision Attack Munition missiles fired hit their targets; two missiles impacted more than 14 kilometers from the target.

The Army has identified some of the problems, including data misinterpretation by the missile’s onboard computer, motor problems and a circuit board failure. OSD recommended that the Army conduct more flight tests once the problems have been corrected.

Army Lt. Gen. Robert Lennox, Deputy Chief of Staff Army G-8, said needed fixes are being made and asked lawmakers for patience and to await further tests.

— Greg

  • Vitor

    So, crappy software, crappy hardware and crappy engine. Congrats! The US Army just looked like a third world country trying to develop their first weapons during the 80s.

  • Project Thor

    *Let’s not even bring up the York*. At the cost of each missle, it should come with a bottle of Scotch and a good hooker….

  • Moose

    Not quite a “failed missile” as a missile that “is failing” currently. Far from a lost cause and still a good system to have.

  • ohwilleke

    Have they not heard of quality control in military contracting? This is a missile their taking about, not an Microsoft(R) product.

  • WillyPete

    Moose… IS it a good system to have?
    Or, is it an advertising claim that you “should want” this system, regardless of whether it actually works, or not?
    We’ve spent a LOT of money on this thing, and it’s not like there aren’t other missile systems out there!
    This ain’t the Osprey!
    Ohwilleke, yes, they HAVE heard of quality control in military contracting!
    And, every time that phrase gets mentioned it, they fire the poor dumb schlub who implied that it even matters!
    As Dick Johnson said in Robocop: “No one cares if it actually works!” :(

    • Brian

      Dick Jones, not Dick Johnson.

  • tomato

    reminds me of the patriot missles

  • Locarno

    14 Kilometres….

    I was kind of hoping that was a typo the first time. The tests were only at 35 clicks range – how in the name of all that’s holy did it miss by half the total range to the target?

    ….And, as an afterthought, in which direction?

  • Alice

    The rabbit is out of the box with lots of quality issues…………Off with their heads!

  • Ben

    Although the missile has problems, it probably has more to do with the contractor for the missile. The rest of the system, CLU and Mission controller, have performed great. It would be a shame to waste the CLU or Mission planner because of the missile. There are other missiles that can be vertical launched.

  • golars

    Golars personnel have extensive experience in providing consultation with federal, state and local regulators, voluntary remediation programs, Remediation strategies and Brownfield programs, and provide site investigations, health risk assessments, risk prioritization and analysis of Brownfield cleanup alternatives to maximize public-private investment dollars.
    http://www.golars.com/remediation-strategies-solu

    Remediation strategies