Mysterious Shipping Container Rocket Launcher Spotted At Trump's Visit To Fort Bragg
The launcher inside the container is visible off to the side in a video, seen below, from President Donald Trump's visit to Fort Bragg today, which was posted online by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino. Trump was given demonstrations of various Army capabilities at the base's Holland Drop Zone, including the launch of artillery rockets. A separate launcher, the type of which is not immediately clear, was used to fire those rounds.
President Trump arrives at the Holland Drop Zone—Fort Bragg… pic.twitter.com/VQrOWoyata
— Dan Scavino (@Scavino47) June 10, 2025
President Trump also observed paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division jump from a U.S. Air Force C-17 cargo plane and a mock special operations assault involving Green Berets and the elite 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment SOAR). A transporter erector launcher for the Soviet-designed Scud ballistic missile, or a full-scale mockup of one, is also notably present in the footage of the special operations demonstration. Bragg is the Army's main special operations hub, as well as home to the 82nd Airborne Division, among other units.
The 82nd Airborne Division
https://t.co/FM63TCgAjwpic.twitter.com/j6ZCW4pcNW
— Dan Scavino (@Scavino47) June 10, 2025
FORT BRAGG—@USArmy
https://t.co/FM63TCgAjwpic.twitter.com/koqseAfR9q
— Dan Scavino (@Scavino47) June 10, 2025
TWZ has not been able to quickly find additional information about the containerized launcher, but it is not entirely new. In August 2024, Military Times posted a video of it, seen below, across its social media accounts, but with no additional context. We have reached out to the Army for more details.
What is clear is that the containerized launcher, the entire roof of which is designed to open to one side, can accommodate two of the same ammunition 'pods' used as the tracked M270 MRLS and wheeled M142 HIMARS launch vehicles. Pods are available that come loaded with six 227mm guided artillery rockets, a single Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missile, or two Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM). ATACMS and PrSM, the latter of which is beginning to enter Army service now to replace the former, are both short-range ballistic missiles.
Current-generation 227mm artillery rockets in Army inventory can hit targets some 50 miles (around 80 kilometers) away, and a variant with a maximum range of just over 93 miles (150 kilometers) entered production last year. The longest range variant of the ATACMS short-range ballistic missile in Army service today can reach targets out to 186 miles (300 kilometers).
The initial version of PrSM, also known as Increment 1, has a range of 310 miles (500 kilometers), but there are also plans to extend that out to 620 miles (1,000 kilometers) or more. It's worth noting that a PrSM with a range beyond 620 miles/1,000 kilometers would be categorized as at least a medium-range ballistic missile. The Army is also developing an anti-ship variant of PrSM with a new seeker and is eyeing further versions with 'enhanced lethality payloads' that could include miniature smart bombs and kamikaze drones.
The Army is also currently exploring new pods loaded with smaller rockets that could expand the magazine depth of M270 and M142 launcher vehicles, but at the cost of a reduction in range. The service has been experimenting with new launcher vehicles that can fire this same family of munitions, including uncrewed types and a design offering significantly expanded ammunition capacity.
Being able to launch this array of rockets and missiles already gives M270 and M142 immense flexibility. A containerized launcher would open up additional possibilities, including the ability to turn any truck that can carry a standard shipping container into a platform capable of firing long-range guided rockets and missiles. This, in turn, could help the Army more readily expand its available launch capacity as required.
The containerized launchers could also be deployed in a fixed mode, offering forward operating bases the ability to hold targets at risk dozens, if not hundreds of miles away. This can include providing an on-call form of organic air/fire support for troops operating far from the forward base. The launcher inside the container cannot traverse laterally, but an array of them could be positioned in such a way to provide maximum coverage in all directions.
Being a container-based design, whether deployed in a truck-mounted or fixed configuration, they would be readily relocatable from one location to another. The containerized launchers could also be loaded on rail cars and or employed from ships with sufficient open deck space.
In any of these modes, the launcher would benefit from its unassuming outward appearance. This would present challenges for opponents when it comes to detection and targeting, since any container could potentially be loaded with rockets or ballistic missiles. As already mentioned, Ukraine just demonstrated the value of concealed launch capabilities in its unprecedented covert drone attacks on multiple Russian air bases. Other countries, including Russia, China, and Iran, have also been developing containerized launch systems for artillery rockets and/or missiles.
In terms of naval use, specifically, it's also worth mentioning here that the U.S. Navy is already in the process of fielding a different containerized missile launcher, designed to fire Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles and SM-6 multi-purpose missiles, in shipboard and tractor-trailer configurations. The Navy launcher is based on the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS) found on various American and foreign warships, and is directly related to the Army's ground-based Typhon system that can also currently fire Tomahawks and SM-6s.
How close the containerized launcher seen at Fort Bragg may or may not be to becoming an operational capability is unclear, but its potential value is not hard to see.
Contact the author: joe@twz.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
a minute ago
- UPI
Mexico's Sheinbaum says no to 'invasion' by U.S. military
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum on Friday said Mexico is working with the United States to oppose drug cartels and related criminal activity but will not let the U.S. military operate on Mexican soil. File Photo by Isaac Esquivel/EPA-EFE Aug. 9 (UPI) -- Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum won't allow U.S. troops to target drug cartels in Mexico that President Donald Trump has designated as terrorist groups. Sheinbaum responded to a New York Times report indicating Trump directed the military to target drug cartels in Mexico. The Trump administration is considering using military force against Mexican drug cartels, including launching missiles from U.S. Navy destroyers to target cartels and their infrastructure. "The United States is not going to come to Mexico with the military," Sheinbaum said on Friday, as reported by The New York Times. "We cooperate [and] we collaborate, but there is not going to be an invasion," Sheinbaum said. "That is ruled out -- absolutely ruled out." Sheinbaum said U.S. military action in Mexico "is not part of any agreement." "When it has been brought up, we have always said 'no,'" she added. Despite objections from Mexican officials, Trump directed the U.S. military to target drug cartels that are designated as terrorist organizations, The New York Times reported on Friday. Although reports suggest the Pentagon is evaluating possible military strikes, it's unlikely that Trump would okay such operations, The Washington Post reported. An anonymous U.S. official who is familiar with the matter told the Post that it's unlikely such military actions would be carried out. Another said the Pentagon would not use troops on the ground and instead would consider employing drone or naval assets to carry out surgical strikes on cartel targets. No military strikes are likely to occur soon and possibly never will happen, according to The Washington Post. The ultimate goal is to protect U.S. citizens against violent crime and deadly drugs, such as fentanyl, that originate from south of the U.S.-Mexico border, according to the Trump administration. "President Trump's top priority is protecting the homeland, which is why he took the bold step to designate several cartels and gangs as foreign terrorist organizations," White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly told The Washington Post. Trump earlier this year designated eight drug cartels, including six in Mexico, as terrorist organizations. Sheinbaum at the time said the United States can't use the terrorist designation as a pretext for undertaking military operations in Mexico. Mexican authorities have worked with the Trump administration to lessen the amount if drugs and "migrants" crossing into the United States from Mexico. Ronald Johnson, the U.S. ambassador to Mexico, in a prepared statement said the United States is working with Mexican officials to oppose drug cartels. "We stand together as sovereign partners," Johnson said on Friday in a social media post. "We face a common enemy: The violent criminal cartels," Johnson said. "We will use every tool at our disposal to protect our peoples."
UPI
a minute ago
- UPI
UCLA gets $1B settlement proposal from DOJ to restore federal funding
1 of 4 | Earlier this week, UCLA announced it had lost millions in federal research funding after the Trump administration accused the university of failing to protect Jewish students during on-campus pro-Palestinian protests. File Photo by Phil McCarten/UPI | License Photo Aug. 9 (UPI) -- The U.S. Justice Department is asking for $1 billion from the University of California, Los Angeles in exchange for re-starting federal funding to the public land-grant research institution, school officials confirmed. "The University of California just received a document from the Department of Justice and is reviewing it," University of California President James Milliken said in a statement this week. "As a public university, we are stewards of taxpayer resources and a payment of this scale would completely devastate our country's greatest public university system as well as inflict great harm on our students and all Californians." Earlier this week, UCLA announced it had lost millions in federal research funding after the Justice Department accused it of failing to protect Jewish students during on-campus pro-Palestinian protests. The school at the time did not specify a dollar amount, but that figure is now believed to be around $500 million. "The UC Board of Regents and the UC Office of the President are providing counsel as we actively evaluate our best course of action. I will continue to be in constant communication with you on key decisions and update you on any developments," UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk said following Milliken's statement. The deal offered by President Donald Trump's administration to the 106-year-old academic institution would involve the school making a $1 billion payment. It would also pay an additional $172 million which would go to a larger fund to compensate victims of civil rights violations, the New York Times reported, citing a draft of the proposal. Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., said the state would push back against the proposed settlement. "We'll sue," Newsom told reporters at a news conference Friday when asked about the news. Newsom had been discussing California's involvement with Texas lawmakers who are trying to block a Republican redistricting plan in the Lone Star state. "[Trump] is trying to silence academic freedom," Newsom said, "attacking one of the most important public institutions in the United States of America." Columbia University last month agreed to pay $221 million in fines to settle similar accusations against the private New York City university. At the time, Trump said he also expected to reach a settlement with Harvard University.
New York Times
31 minutes ago
- New York Times
Ousted F.D.A. Vaccine Chief Returns to Agency
Dr. Vinay Prasad, who led the Food and Drug Administration's vaccines and gene therapy division before resigning under pressure two weeks ago, is returning to the agency, a Department of Health and Human Services spokesman confirmed Saturday. Dr. Prasad left the F.D.A. in late July after being targeted by the right-wing activist Laura Loomer and others who criticized his decisions regarding certain medications and pointed out critical comments he had made about President Trump before joining the administration. A series of editorials published in the weeks leading up to Dr. Prasad's resignation also appeared to have contributed to the pressure on him. Those editorials found fault with his decisions to deny drug approvals and to demand a pause on a medication linked to several patient deaths. Dr. Prasad's return was an unusual instance of a federal official being allowed to rejoin the administration after being targeted by Ms. Loomer for being insufficiently loyal to the president. She has repeatedly demonstrated her influence over federal personnel decisions. His rehiring also suggests that the health secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and the F.D.A. commissioner, Dr. Marty Makary, remain influential enough in the Trump administration to employ someone who had previously expressed disdain for Mr. Trump and his followers. 'At the F.D.A.'s request, Dr. Vinay Prasad is resuming leadership of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research,' Andrew Nixon, a health department spokesman, said in a statement. In a post on X Saturday, Ms. Loomer called Dr. Prasad's return 'another egregious personnel decision,' describing him as a 'Marxist.' She also pledged to ramp up her campaign against other health officials she deemed 'rabid Trump haters.' Before the resignation, Mr. Kennedy and Dr. Makary had defended Dr. Prasad against the mounting attacks, even as those seeking to have him fired lobbied the White House directly with their concerns, people familiar with the conversations said. Dr. Makary called him an 'impeccable scientist,' and Mr. Kennedy told an associate he wanted Dr. Prasad at the F.D.A. in part because of his approach to vaccines, according to people familiar with the conversation. Dr. Prasad had played a key role in the decision in May to limit the use of the Covid vaccine to people over 65 and to those with medical conditions that put them at high risk for severe illness. Their advocacy fell short, though, and Dr. Prasad issued his resignation on July 29. Dr. Prasad's long-running penchant for sharp criticism of the federal health bureaucracy, often peppered with expletives, led to intense speculation about the reasons for his ouster. It was a surprise to many in medical circles when Dr. Makary said at an event with Mr. Kennedy earlier this week that he was seeking to bring Dr. Prasad back to the F.D.A. Before entering government, Dr. Prasad was an oncologist and epidemiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, where he was active on Substack, YouTube and other social media sites, often excoriating public health officials for their approaches to the pandemic and what he viewed as poor decisions by the F.D.A. After joining the agency, he attracted attention for declining to approve several drugs, including one meant to treat advanced skin cancer and another meant to treat heart conditions for patients with a rare muscle disorder. Dr. Prasad had long called on the F.D.A. to take a stronger stance against drugs with a high price tag and uncertain benefits for patients. He has taken a similar position on vaccines, saying they need more careful examination before authorization and heightened scrutiny after. In the weeks before his ouster, Dr. Prasad also called on the company Sarepta Therapeutics to stop shipping its gene therapy drugs after the deaths of two teenagers and a 51-year-old man were deemed related to the medication. The company initially refused but later conceded. Since then, the company has resumed shipments of the medication for younger patients.
