|
Interesting article on that Eisenhower/Hawkeye cable snap: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/07/11/navy-human-error-blame-cable-break-that-injured-eight-sailors.html?ESRC=navy-a_160713.nl Looks like a few deck personnel "arrested" the recoiling cable with their legs. That's gotta hurt. Also a "phenomenal airmanship" credit to the Hawkeye crew.
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
Bulgaroctonus posted:Does a steady diet of Steel Reserve, OE if necessary, count ? NO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
DepletedUranium posted:This is the answer to your question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM#Ground-launched_systems  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/TWQ-1_Avenger  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M163_VADS  Not sure why we don't have a mobile RIM-161 (SM-3) missile system built into a cargo container. It could be land based, truck based, or even sit on any kind of ship.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
So just how delusional is this?quote:a new fighter F22 E (exports) post 2020-22. to be purchased by only handful of nations (5 in numbers as of now with Japan and India and 3 others with limited purchases) The guy makes a lot of tall claims and I haven't seen any become proven by reality so far, and I'm sure if he were really as in the loop as he pretends he'd be a little more non-disclosing. I figured y'all would enjoy talks about a Monkey Model F-22 being offered to India.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:Not sure why we don't have a mobile RIM-161 (SM-3) missile system built into a cargo container. It could be land based, truck based, or even sit on any kind of ship. We do, sorta. It isn't mobile though, there's just way too much stuff to move without it all being attached to a ship.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Don't forget LAV-AD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XooFmPUt6aA
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
bewbies posted:We do, sorta. It isn't mobile though, there's just way too much stuff to move without it all being attached to a ship. We showed this to Israel. They liked it so much that they said no and designed a complete system with similar capabilities, more flexibility, and different operations.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:Not sure why we don't have a mobile RIM-161 (SM-3) missile system built into a cargo container. It could be land based, truck based, or even sit on any kind of ship. SM-3 isn't exactly a self-contained unit. You'd need another cargo container with a SPY-1, another with all the datalinks and C3 equipment, another with the operator stations, then more space to provide power for all that, and pretty soon you might as well just package it all into some kind of guided missile... boat thingy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:SM-3 isn't exactly a self-contained unit. You'd need another cargo container with a SPY-1, another with all the datalinks and C3 equipment, another with the operator stations, then more space to provide power for all that, and pretty soon you might as well just package it all into some kind of guided missile... boat thingy. I suspected. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM#Ground-launched_systems None of these share the combat record of this man's namesake system: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:So just how delusional is this? lol he's claiming that India is going to be the global depot facility for F-16s? Pretty sure there's a couple billion dollars worth of infrastructure sitting down the road from me in Utah that would make that point a little irrelevant. Of course this is claiming to just be talks between the govt and LM, so I'm sure that LM is promising the government a whole bunch of different things.......but based on previous performance, unless the government's negotiators are getting a whole bunch of money in swiss bank accounts they shouldn't believe a word that is coming out of a LM negotiator's mouth. For starters I don't see how it would even be possible to produce a monkey-model Raptor, the sensitive stuff is wholly integrated into the overall design. And as that post alludes to, that discussion is a moot point until the Senate changes the law....which I don't see happening any time soon for a variety of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:So just how delusional is this? India? Why not sell it to Russia and China directly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:http://www.drabblecast.org/2013/12/06/drabblecast-305-testimony-emergency-session-naval-cephalopod-command/ That was an excellent short story
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Seriously though if anyone has any bright ideas about a mobile, tactical air defense system let me know Near as I can tell, back in the '80s the Army got all crotch swollen about this:  But instead of just building a NATO ZSU we got poo poo that was something between this:  and this:  And none of it works.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
Enourmo posted:Wait, is it actually Robotech, or the original Macross? Honestly not sure, but probably a translated form of the American version.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
DepletedUranium posted:Near as I can tell, back in the '80s the Army got all crotch swollen about this: Makes US decks pretty garbage in wargame too, p. embarrassing really.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
wkarma posted:Don't forget LAV-AD There was also the M6 Linebacker.  The Army almost ended up adopting the Euromissile Roland (as the MIM-115) in the 80s, but it ended up too expensive due to "improvements" and they were only operated by a single National Guard unit between 1983-1988 (IIRC) because a handful of launchers had already been built. Probably about the closest the US has ever come to operating a proper short-range missile system! https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1984/08/28/improved-missile-too-costly-for-pentagon/d3cc6b34-6b28-4e49-8675-0e3f074ffcec/ quote:In 1975, after a six-year search for an effective antiaircraft weapon, the U.S. Army took a European missile that worked reasonably well and began an improvement program that eventually would make it too expensive for the Pentagon to buy. quote:The United States has considered selling the Rolands, giving them to another country, mothballing them or sending them to Canada, Norway or West Germany. All options are on hold.  
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
I often wondered how the ADATS was, but I'm guessing probably pretty bleh. Something for both anti-air and anti-tank sounds like a real cost saver but in the end it probably kinda sucked at both. Dollar cost wise they're probably reeeeeeally expensive for the anti-tank role, per missile.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 07:28
|
|
|
I was wondering the same thing. The answer is evidently holy poo poo, it's much worse than you can possibly imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 10:07
|
|
|
simplefish posted:That was an excellent short story The most impressive part is where it was wholly written by a goon and still it's pretty great. Now go read Charles Stross' A Colder War.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
What in the name of gently caress is this thing, it looks rad
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 12:33
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:What in the name of gently caress is this thing, it looks rad
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 13:04
|
|
|
I read a funny story somewhere about the air defense woes of the Bundeswehr where they, due to the retirement of Gepard, had to notionally shanghai the Romanian Gepard battalion for some war game because otherwise they would've had bupkis. Last operator of Gepard apparently: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
Don't the French have any AA tanks? Also, Boris Johnson, a man who makes Jeremy Clarkson look like Ban Kai-moon, is the UK's new foreign secretary. Good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
What about Starstreak in the SHORAD role? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starstreak It's apparently very well regarded in the British Army. Although since it's predecessor was Rapier, that's less impressive than it might sound.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Don't the French have any AA tanks? They have some truck-mounted Mistrals and tracked Crotale launchers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:What about Starstreak in the SHORAD role? Doesn't differ much from Stinger or any other SHORAD package, which is already in service, sometimes on mobile platforms even. You need a bigger missile to increase the dead zone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM#Ground-launched_systems I don't think a mobile radar system was ever paired with it. I'm actually not sure how far Aegis Ashore got, but it sure as hell didn't get miniaturized enough for a truck. They could certainly pair a smaller, portable radar with it, but $$$. And I'm actually not sure if we even have an appropriate radar in service. Off the top of my head I can't think of one. Give it a miniature TPS-75 or something, and program to accept off-board cueing and you've got a very good platform.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Rough requirements for a modern mobile air defense platform: - Protected against fragments and rounds up to 14.5mm - Tactical mobility comparable to current MBT/IFV - NOT C-130 capable - Slant range of at least 20km with at least a 4 engagement magazine - Integrated, directional EW - Network integrated In addition, "nice to haves": - Integrated radar/sensor - Limited CRAM capability - Deep magazines I'm pretty sure this doesn't exist yet anywhere, Pantsir is probably closest. Will probably require missile and gun (or laser lol) combo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:lol he's claiming that India is going to be the global depot facility for F-16s? Pretty sure there's a couple billion dollars worth of infrastructure sitting down the road from me in Utah that would make that point a little irrelevant. Yeah, but that's all going to shift to F-35 in the next few years. As the US divests itself of active Vipers I could see India taking over. Somebody's gonna have to. Edit: We're probably at the point where "lol laser" is just 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Rough requirements for a modern mobile air defense platform: Take old M1 Abrams hulls that we have stockpiled and stick a new turret on them that has a 30mm gun and 4-8 AIM-9xs? Then put a GIRAFFE radar on top. e: oh wait that wouldn't have EW would it
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Take old M1 Abrams hulls that we have stockpiled and stick a new turret on them that has a 30mm gun and 4-8 AIM-9xs? Then put a GIRAFFE radar on top. I like where this is going, can someone do a quick photoshop mockup?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Take old M1 Abrams hulls that we have stockpiled and stick a new turret on them that has a 30mm gun and 4-8 AIM-9xs? Then put a GIRAFFE radar on top. Does a 9X have that much range when coming from a stationary ground platform?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Does a 9X have that much range when coming from a stationary ground platform?  I just think a tank would look cool with big missiles hanging off it
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Take old M1 Abrams hulls that we have stockpiled and stick a new turret on them that has a 30mm gun and 4-8 AIM-9xs? Then put a GIRAFFE radar on top. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:
I'm saying bigger is better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Does a 9X have that much range when coming from a stationary ground platform? Not really, but that doesn't mean there's not a valid need for something like that. Really, a 1-size-fits-all system is not likely to work well. Having a couple of cheaper, tailored systems would be better. A 9x-based short range system, and something longer range like Aegis Ashore or even an AIM-120D based system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
I'm not a rocket scientist, but I would have thought you could have a bigger booster phase mounted to the back of the AIM-9X and job's done? Like I just find it mind-boggling that you have all these MRM and LRM systems made by the Soviets that work. While the USA has all the component parts to make equivalents, putting them together is apperntly too hard?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
Did someone say CRAM? Imagine if we switched the software in a CRAM back to CIWS and then put a fake semi-truck box around it, and then let one of the FSA drive it near to one of the Russian Airbases The Russians come back in from a sortie on approach, the box falls away and WHAMMO! No more SU-XX's.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
B4Ctom1 posted:Did someone say CRAM? Imagine if we switched the software in a CRAM back to CIWS Dahir Insaat already has that patent, I bet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2016 18:34
|
|
