(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The F-16 was an even bigger success than the F-5, though. Designed for export programs seem relatively inefficient compared to just designing something good and then selling it. Production volume makes a huge difference in terms of amortizing the development costs.
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:Yeah that is a complete 180 from their previous plan. Antigravitas posted:Germany just left the MGCS in favour of a new agreement with Italy, Spain, and Sweden, so the US Army is not the only one reevaluating their future tank project. Oh, seriously! I didn't see that. Does that mean only France is involved? I wonder if it was driven by lessons from Ukraine (MGCS wasn't supposed to have anything built until 2040) or by other considerations. Kaal posted:That’s probably for the best since that program has been moving so slowly. It seems overly similar to the many ill fated American programs that promise everything to everyone, and end up mostly being a hodgepodge work program. A reset is a good opportunity for a clearer vision to prevail. The Army really sucked at procurement from the mid-1990s through the mid-2010's. They seem to have finally got their poo poo together, though. If you look at the huge number of modernization programs they're largely hitting dates and putting actual capability into the hands of warfighters. Djarum posted:...You have to remember it was designed in the 70s to fight a foe that is now gone and for a battlefield that is not in existence anymore. I'm not sure I completely agree with your reasoning. The Abrams was in many ways designed to fight exactly this enemy. Sure, Russia has more modern EW, drones, etc., but Abrams was expressly designed to take on T-72s, T-64s, BMP-1s and BMP-2s, HIND helicopters, and the like. Russian 125mm Sabot built after 2010 or so might be able to penetrate an Abram's frontal armor, but ammunition earlier than that can't. That said, I agree that Ukraine is demonstrating that modern AFVs need a lot of capabilities, and the point of view of redesigning from the hull up to use these capabilities is being validated. Apparently you can do a lot of things with e.g. additive manufacturing that increase hull strength and save weight. But you can't retrofit that kind of thing, so you might as well re-design. Finally, I think there's a lot of value in reducing logistical footprints: doing so presents a smaller target for your adversary, and effectively builds in resiliency. Both of these are necessary in an era of perpetual observation and attritional warfare.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 19:44
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Oh, seriously! I didn't see that. Does that mean only France is involved? I wonder if it was driven by lessons from Ukraine (MGCS wasn't supposed to have anything built until 2040) or by other considerations. It's very hot off the presses and Germany hasn't formally left, but you don't announce a new tank coop with other countries without, you know… I suspect it's a mix. I really don't know why people keep trying to have common defense projects with France on things where the two armies have wildly different requirements. FCAS is probably going the same way because Germany really doesn't need to launch from carriers, among other things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 19:48
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:If they can track and hit Mach+ missiles with ~30 round bursts they absolutely can track and hit even small fast drones that probably don't even go 300mph in the same or less expenditure of ammo. https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cw5WBURom4L/?igshid=MTc4MmM1YmI2Ng== Sorry about the Instagram link. It's a POV footage from Gepard, shooting down a drone
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 19:58
|
|
|
Instagram never loads for me, but if it's the video that has been making the rounds, that's two Shaheds shot down by two bursts each using impact fuzed ammo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
Remember the video clips and photos from the spring of Ukrainian sea drones washed up along the Crimean coast? https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/elon-musk-biography-walter-isaacson-ukraine-starlink/index.html quote:Elon Musk secretly ordered his engineers to turn off his company’s Starlink satellite communications network near the Crimean coast last year to disrupt a Ukrainian sneak attack on the Russian naval fleet, according to an excerpt adapted from Walter Isaacson’s new biography of the eccentric billionaire titled “Elon Musk.”
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:16
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Remember the video clips and photos from the spring of Ukrainian sea drones washed up along the Crimean coast? Nonzero chance he got the idea from the famous incel malaysian dipshit https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1699828939311452519?t=9mTucNDoSbOJHHMyYXi__Q&s=19
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:17
|
|
|
I just read that in our national news and god loving dammit that man is a menace.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:17
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:I just read that in our national news and god loving dammit that man is a menace. My list of "people who should be tied overnight to grain silos in Izmail" has a new top entry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:22
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cw5WBURom4L/?igshid=MTc4MmM1YmI2Ng== Yup Gepards work fairly well against Shaheds even with old style ammo. Against tiny fast drones they'd still probably work but the newer 30-25mm autocannons with the special fused ammo should be much much better at this task.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:26
|
|
|
Time to nationalize Starlink and I am only like 40% joking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:27
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Remember the video clips and photos from the spring of Ukrainian sea drones washed up along the Crimean coast? Doesn't that dick head still have national security access due to spacex contracts with the US military? I think that should be revoked now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:Instagram never loads for me, but if it's the video that has been making the rounds, that's two Shaheds shot down by two bursts each using impact fuzed ammo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Yeah, it's that video. i like how he's going 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:47
|
|
|
Cicero posted:And even with those two, the Abrams is heavy, but the Leopard is similar, and while the Abrams has a turbine engine, technically it can run on diesel too (just worse IIRC). And the F-35 is a stealth fighter, there's probably some inherent logistical issues with that (though we don't have any other allied 5th gen fighters to compare against). And they buy the F-35 because if U.S. allies want a 5th Gen fighter it's kinda their only option. Very few nations have the capacity to build a cutting'ish edge fighter jet. So for most of them, it's F-35 or nothing. Tanks are much more manageable. If you don't like the Abrams, there are other viable options up-to-and including building something domestically.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Isn't that only true for a handful of platforms, like the Abrams and F-35? Are Bradleys or Strykers or Paladins unusually hard to supply and support compared to other options from peer nations?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:i like how he's going It's hard to tell exactly but he could also be saying "есть" or "yest" which, depending on context, can also mean or "aye" or "okay"
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:03
|
|
|
DTurtle posted:The F-35 is turning into an export hit though? Everybody with money and access has started ordering those things in quantity. No you’re supposed to pretend it’s a decade ago and it’s the dumbest worst plane ever and not something seven countries including ones with domestic air industries desperately want
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:04
|
|
|
No F35 chat please unless they are pledged to Ukraine somehow
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:19
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:No F35 chat please unless they are pledged to Ukraine somehow calling my congressman in the hope that it will let us continue this derail
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:It's hard to tell exactly but he could also be saying "есть" or "yest" which, depending on context, can also mean Yeah idk the spelling in Ukrainian (єсть?) but a lot of videos showing stugna or stinger or javelin or whatever hits have them shouting есть, and not "yes". Sounds similar but there's a definite "T" sound at the end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:24
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:I'm not sure I completely agree with your reasoning. The Abrams was in many ways designed to fight exactly this enemy. Sure, Russia has more modern EW, drones, etc., but Abrams was expressly designed to take on T-72s, T-64s, BMP-1s and BMP-2s, HIND helicopters, and the like. Russian 125mm Sabot built after 2010 or so might be able to penetrate an Abram's frontal armor, but ammunition earlier than that can't. Abrams will be/are fighting the war they were designed to right now but militaries around the world really need to be thinking about the war they could potentially be in 10-20 years from now is what I am saying. China especially is going to learn a lot of lessons from this and modify their equipment, tactics and doctrine to take advantage. It makes sense to change the approach of things now and hopefully we don't need to learn lessons out about the new changes in warfare ever again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:Nonzero chance he got the idea from the famous incel malaysian dipshit I wonder if interfering, or just actively participating in an armed conflict might have some legal consequences.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:26
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:Yeah idk the spelling in Ukrainian (єсть?) but a lot of videos showing stugna or stinger or javelin or whatever hits have them shouting есть, and not "yes". Sounds similar but there's a definite "T" sound at the end. It's hard to hear, but to me sounds like he's just speaking Russian (which anecdotally seems to be really common in the Ukrainian military). It sounds like he's saying "Есть. Да, есть!" My Ukrainian sucks and I know almost no military jargon in either language, but I think the equivalent words in Ukrainian would be "є" and "так."
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:37
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:I wonder if interfering, or just actively participating in an armed conflict might have some legal consequences. I'm not sure either, but it seems that, considering the amount of direct business both NASA and the US military conduct with Space X, the US gov should really start making plans for what to do with this guy who is personally and actively sabotaging US defense policy. If Elon had made his company during the Cold War and then tried this kind of stunt he would've been hung out to dry far worse than Oppenheimer. Elon is the ultimate example in problems appeasement creates. He's been duped into thinking playing softball with Russia is the only way to preserve global stability. Except unlike a terminally-online uncle, he has direct control over 2 of the most powerful communication tools both sides need in the war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:43
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:I wonder if interfering, or just actively participating in an armed conflict might have some legal consequences. there's no real consequences for the rich in america unless you steal from other rich people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:44
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:Time to nationalize Starlink and I am only like 40% joking. I'm mostly still a libertarian and I would 100% support nationalizing it. Skippy McPants posted:And they buy the F-35 because if U.S. allies want a 5th Gen fighter it's kinda their only option. Very few nations have the capacity to build a cutting'ish edge fighter jet. So for most of them, it's F-35 or nothing. Yes, though only the US and the UK have Chobham armor. Supposedly Mitsubishi has some sort of specialized steel armor for Japan's tanks, though. Djarum posted:Abrams will be/are fighting the war they were designed to right now but militaries around the world really need to be thinking about the war they could potentially be in 10-20 years from now is what I am saying. China especially is going to learn a lot of lessons from this and modify their equipment, tactics and doctrine to take advantage. It makes sense to change the approach of things now and hopefully we don't need to learn lessons out about the new changes in warfare ever again. Okay, I understand you better now, and I agree. One of the most interesting things coming out of Ukraine will be seeing if we (the "West", by which I include Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Phillipines, Australia) can deter China faster than China thinks they can use military force to exert direct control over Taiwan and the South China Sea. I hope we can. Ynglaur fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Sep 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:46
|
|
|
99% of the time the military rolling in and taking over a civilian institution is real bad but this might just be that 1% so I am actively rooting for them to send in a company of the California National Guard to seize everything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 21:48
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:I wonder if interfering, or just actively participating in an armed conflict might have some legal consequences. my understanding is that ukraine and the us have both paid some amount to spacex for starlink terminals and service. it sounds like purchasing is being done on a real ad hoc per terminal basis with spacex providing some kind of nebulous discount. not sure what, if any, government purchasing or service agreements are in place normally i would assume there would be at least some sort of additional boilerplate language for terminals and services provided to ukraine above and beyond the bog standard user agreement, but with elon who knows
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:If they can track and hit Mach+ missiles with ~30 round bursts they absolutely can track and hit even small fast drones that probably don't even go 300mph in the same or less expenditure of ammo. I didn’t say they can’t be hit, I asked how much ammo you’d need to hit them. If you have to expend thousands of rounds to hit a $500 drone how often will you have to reload and how will you defend against a constant stream of drones?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:Nonzero chance he got the idea from the famous incel malaysian dipshit Lmao. Just saw IMC's tweet today in an article about a bunch of idiots on social media drawing insane conclusions from seeing a tiktok about a cashierless store at a Minsk petrol station. Apparently, such a thing could never exist in the crime-ridden Biden's America, unlike the society of trust that is Belarus under Lukashenko. Really glad that thanks to a blue check next to his name that's the type of person who has actual influence on lives of people in a war-torn country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:12
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:I wonder if interfering, or just actively participating in an armed conflict might have some legal consequences. Probably not because Ukraine can't get to him but if he tried to pull that poo poo on a US operation, he might make history for landing the rare and fabled treason conviction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:20
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:I didn’t say they can’t be hit, I asked how much ammo you’d need to hit them. If you have to expend thousands of rounds to hit a $500 drone how often will you have to reload and how will you defend against a constant stream of drones? A constant stream of drones is going to be easier to take down than individual ones. The drones are dumb and clumsy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:22
|
|
|
Nitrox posted:I wonder if interfering, or just actively participating in an armed conflict might have some legal consequences. Probably not with the U.S. government, since they would like to avoid conflicts with the billionaire class. Ukrainian GUR, OTOH? Musk taking a skydive from the roof of Twitter HQ would solve a lot of problems with keeping Starlink viable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:I didn’t say they can’t be hit, I asked how much ammo you’d need to hit them. If you have to expend thousands of rounds to hit a $500 drone how often will you have to reload and how will you defend against a constant stream of drones? well he said 30 rounds or less to hit a mach 3 missile, and even less than that for a drone so i dunno how you got to thousands of rounds required to hit a $500 drone?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:I didn’t say they can’t be hit, I asked how much ammo you’d need to hit them. If you have to expend thousands of rounds to hit a $500 drone how often will you have to reload and how will you defend against a constant stream of drones? You don't need 1,000's for 1 drone. The newer ammos have on the fly programmable fuses and explosive fragmentation projectiles that explode when they get near a drone, missile, or whatever. When they blow that is where you get your 1,000's of fragments in a burst of shells. Here is an example for Bofor's 3P ammo and its effect on a small drone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG9QK-Uq_bA There are several other guns and ammo systems out there but they have similar performance for a given sized projectile. 20-30 rounds to take out a fighter or high speed missile is what some are publicly advertised as capable of. I don't know what it is exactly for drones but it'll be less. We know this because, as someone posted the vid a bit up thread, Gepards can already shoot down drones just fine with the old impact fused ammo with short 3-5 round bursts. Gepards are OLD too. From the late 60's/early 70's. They did get upgraded in the 80's I think but still. OLD. The newer systems like Rheinmetall's Skyranger are huge upgrades that you're going to see rolled out more and more. PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Sep 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:37
|
|
|
These drone games headcanon are rapidly approaching “one weird trick to beat the USAF- biplanes from a century ago that can fly double digit speeds without stalling, hahahahahahah”
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:41
|
|
|
the drones will always get through
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 22:51
|
|
|
Djarum posted:Abrams will be/are fighting the war they were designed to right now but militaries around the world really need to be thinking about the war they could potentially be in 10-20 years from now is what I am saying. China especially is going to learn a lot of lessons from this and modify their equipment, tactics and doctrine to take advantage. It makes sense to change the approach of things now and hopefully we don't need to learn lessons out about the new changes in warfare ever again. I can't parse this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
I don’t think we are getting through to each other. Maybe I can summarise what I’m saying in a way that’s less controversial. Drones may not be much easier to take down than hypersonic missions because of their ability to observe and react, and they’ll be a lot cheaper and more available to anyone who wants to exert force. I definitely take the points about explosive ammo and lasers. I suspect you’d be surprised how effective a mirrored skirt around the drones would be at making a laser defence impractical for large numbers (potentially turning fractions of a second per kill into multiple seconds per kill). Explosive ammo is definitely more promising because there’s a strong correlation between protection and weight on the drone. But I think you’re suffering a failure of imagination about future capabilities. The expensive part of intelligence is designing/training it. You can buy a consumer drone right now that will lock on to a human being follow you around. You can buy a camera for a few hundred dollars that can monitor a region of interest thousands of times per second. Both of those tasks will be an order of magnitude cheaper ten years from now. Don’t imagine a “swarm” of Shaheds. Imagine 10,000 drones the size of dinner rolls that cost one million dollars in total flying towards you in a cloud 2km wide, each capable of individually identifying and seeking targets.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2023 23:30
|
|