[Goose]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-...munitions/

The Biden administration plans to provide Ukraine with a version of ATACMS long-range missiles armed with cluster bomblets rather than a single warhead, according to several people familiar with the ongoing deliberations.
...

Cluster-armed ATACMS are no longer considered a front-line U.S. weapon. From an estimated original production of 2,500, some from the early 1990s, many were later refitted with unitary warheads, according to a fiscal year 2018 Defense Department publication. Consideration of the cluster warhead ATACMS was first reported by Reuters.

As of the end of August, the Army had 1,486 ATACMS in its arsenal, 1,122 with unitary warheads and 364 armed with cluster munitions, according to information it provided to lawmakers.

Sounds like old Block I (950 bomblets, inertial guidance, no GPS, 100 mi range, though probably most have been upgraded to newer unitary warhead designs) and Block IA (300 bomblets, inertial and GPS guidance, 190mi range, probably more likely to still be around for transfer) are what are being discussed. These will not be useful for taking out Kerch bridge but would be very effective at blowing up air defenses and airbases.

This is probably correct. The US deprecated cluster munitions so completely that we re-manufactured almost all of them to unitary warheads. This was not a good idea, and I strongly suspect the Army is now loath to give away the few we have.  Obviously they will do so if ordered, but not happily.

The ATACMS has been plagued by infighting between the Air Force and the Army about what weapons are best suited to the "deep strike" mission. This has been compounded by the Army dithering on the extended range precision strike missile. We didn't buy many more of the older ATACMS because we wanted the "new" extended range ones, but exactly what the "new" ones are has been a moving target. In large measure, it still is.

[Goose]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-...munitions/

The Biden administration plans to provide Ukraine with a version of ATACMS long-range missiles armed with cluster bomblets rather than a single warhead, according to several people familiar with the ongoing deliberations.
...

Cluster-armed ATACMS are no longer considered a front-line U.S. weapon. From an estimated original production of 2,500, some from the early 1990s, many were later refitted with unitary warheads, according to a fiscal year 2018 Defense Department publication. Consideration of the cluster warhead ATACMS was first reported by Reuters.

As of the end of August, the Army had 1,486 ATACMS in its arsenal, 1,122 with unitary warheads and 364 armed with cluster munitions, according to information it provided to lawmakers.

Sounds like old Block I (950 bomblets, inertial guidance, no GPS, 100 mi range, though probably most have been upgraded to newer unitary warhead designs) and Block IA (300 bomblets, inertial and GPS guidance, 190mi range, probably more likely to still be around for transfer) are what are being discussed. These will not be useful for taking out Kerch bridge but would be very effective at blowing up air defenses and airbases.

This is probably correct. The US deprecated cluster munitions so completely that we re-manufactured almost all of them to unitary warheads. This was not a good idea, and I strongly suspect the Army is now loath to give away the few we have.  Obviously they will do so if ordered, but not happily.

The ATACMS has been plagued by infighting between the Air Force and the Army about what weapons are best suited to the "deep strike" mission. This has been compounded by the Army dithering on the extended range precision strike missile. We didn't buy many more of the older ATACMS because we wanted the "new" extended range ones, but exactly what the "new" ones are has been a moving target. In large measure, it still is.