User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 3:32:13 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And probably miss at the end. Either its dumb and you are doing some "how did the world begin" type math or its smart and its going to spoofed/jammed/or fooled just like a more effective ASCM Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Assuming linear acceleration, M982 exiting a 200" M777 barrel at 827 m/s will be the same force as 1650 m/s out of an 800" long 16"/50 naval cannon. A base bleed projectile with that muzzle velocity should be able to reach ~100nmi And probably miss at the end. Either its dumb and you are doing some "how did the world begin" type math or its smart and its going to spoofed/jammed/or fooled just like a more effective ASCM I was refrencing this document. They say a 60kg projectile as pictured below will fly 100nmi if launched at 1,800m/s. They want to use coil guns to launch it, but I don't see why a 16"/50cal gun can't be re-purposed for it instead. I am willing to bet a scaled up 500lb guided version of this 132lb projectile would have greater reach due to a higher ballistic coefficient and the ability to glide rather than follow a purely ballistic path. And I was talking about land attack not anti-ship; if long range INS/GPS guidance isn't feasible for that, then I guess we should retire all the tomahawk missiles. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 3:47:57 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was refrencing this document.
They say a 60kg projectile as pictured below will fly 100nmi if launched at 1,800m/s. They want to use coil guns to launch it, but I don't see why a 16"/50cal gun can't be re-purposed for it instead. I am willing to bet a scaled up 500lb guided version of this 132lb projectile would have greater reach due to a higher ballistic coefficient and the ability to glide rather than follow a purely ballistic path. And I was talking about land attack not anti-ship; if long range INS/GPS guidance isn't feasible for that, then I guess we should retire all the tomahawk missiles. http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c304/Zenmastur/Projectile/155mm60kgReferenceProjectile.jpg And the tomahawk missiles we already have are insufficient? So now we need to launch them @ Mach 5 from a 2nd WW cannon, and armor it against 2nd WW Japanese battleship threats? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:25:50 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
$5B worth of sensors and weapons buys you a lot more survivability than $5B worth of armor IMO. The USS Stark survived two missile hits and was returned to service. If even light unarmored ships can survive a hit, and a hit on an armored ship is still a mission kill, how much is the armor worth? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
operating in squadrons and groups, is saving a 5 billion dollar ship, even if out of the fight, worth it? Just tell me how the BBN will bring more capability per dollar... I am not arguing that, I am asking what level of survivability is desirable. There is staying in the fight, and then there is salvaging the ship itself. Primarily against ASCMs I don't think any ship is surviving a torpedo under the keel. $5B worth of sensors and weapons buys you a lot more survivability than $5B worth of armor IMO. The USS Stark survived two missile hits and was returned to service. If even light unarmored ships can survive a hit, and a hit on an armored ship is still a mission kill, how much is the armor worth? Well.... barely survived. And only an initial attack by two Exocet MM38's, only ONE of which detonated - purely by blind luck, BTW. Still, it was an instant mission kill. Any follow-up attack would have sent it to the bottom. Plus, consider that the cost to return STARK to service was damn near the cost of building a new ship. The logical thing to do would have been to scrap it, but there was a pride factor at work on the decision. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:28:58 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The key is to kill your enemy before he kills you. If your enemy gets the first shot, defeat it and kill him while doing so. Same as it's always been. We just can't defeat his shot by absorbing it any more. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
[ we salvaged cole and stark. so there is some level of survivability. how they would do against moderns? Don't know. It would appear the solution now is, "Don't get hit." Streetfighter, if I read it correctly, argued that isn't an option. We have too few ships, that are too expensive to have expendable ships. LCS isn't streetfighter. Can we get enough active defenses to counter? I don't think so. Ships are overweight now, agreed. The key is to kill your enemy before he kills you. If your enemy gets the first shot, defeat it and kill him while doing so. Same as it's always been. We just can't defeat his shot by absorbing it any more. Absolutely. When I was a DH, the First Commandment from 2nd Fleet was "Thou shalt not take the first hit." |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:49:53 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Sylvan
Any enemy worth a fuck isn't going to have a first shot. Its going to be a salvo from hell. Staying power was still part of the equation along with defensive power. the other grumpy black shoe was very generous to give me a spare copy of Hughes' book. Which, along with Corbit and Mahan are my limit of knowledge. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Sylvan
Any enemy worth a fuck isn't going to have a first shot. Its going to be a salvo from hell. Staying power was still part of the equation along with defensive power. the other grumpy black shoe was very generous to give me a spare copy of Hughes' book. Which, along with Corbit and Mahan are my limit of knowledge. Yup. Salvo from hell, which renders armor even less effective. Don't get hit. Originally Posted By Sylvan
Kill your enemy before he kills you. But don't orbit a straight. we are going to get ass raped. Strait. Straight is a poker hand |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:52:25 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was refrencing this document. They say a 60kg projectile as pictured below will fly 100nmi if launched at 1,800m/s. They want to use coil guns to launch it, but I don't see why a 16"/50cal gun can't be re-purposed for it instead. I am willing to bet a scaled up 500lb guided version of this 132lb projectile would have greater reach due to a higher ballistic coefficient and the ability to glide rather than follow a purely ballistic path. And I was talking about land attack not anti-ship; if long range INS/GPS guidance isn't feasible for that, then I guess we should retire all the tomahawk missiles. http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c304/Zenmastur/Projectile/155mm60kgReferenceProjectile.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Assuming linear acceleration, M982 exiting a 200" M777 barrel at 827 m/s will be the same force as 1650 m/s out of an 800" long 16"/50 naval cannon. A base bleed projectile with that muzzle velocity should be able to reach ~100nmi And probably miss at the end. Either its dumb and you are doing some "how did the world begin" type math or its smart and its going to spoofed/jammed/or fooled just like a more effective ASCM I was refrencing this document. They say a 60kg projectile as pictured below will fly 100nmi if launched at 1,800m/s. They want to use coil guns to launch it, but I don't see why a 16"/50cal gun can't be re-purposed for it instead. I am willing to bet a scaled up 500lb guided version of this 132lb projectile would have greater reach due to a higher ballistic coefficient and the ability to glide rather than follow a purely ballistic path. And I was talking about land attack not anti-ship; if long range INS/GPS guidance isn't feasible for that, then I guess we should retire all the tomahawk missiles. http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c304/Zenmastur/Projectile/155mm60kgReferenceProjectile.jpg What's the relationship between altitude and GPS jamming denial/degraded areas? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 4:56:09 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Absolutely. When I was a DH, the First Commandment from 2nd Fleet was "Thou shalt not take the first hit." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[ we salvaged cole and stark. so there is some level of survivability. how they would do against moderns? Don't know. It would appear the solution now is, "Don't get hit." Streetfighter, if I read it correctly, argued that isn't an option. We have too few ships, that are too expensive to have expendable ships. LCS isn't streetfighter. Can we get enough active defenses to counter? I don't think so. Ships are overweight now, agreed. The key is to kill your enemy before he kills you. If your enemy gets the first shot, defeat it and kill him while doing so. Same as it's always been. We just can't defeat his shot by absorbing it any more. Absolutely. When I was a DH, the First Commandment from 2nd Fleet was "Thou shalt not take the first hit." Most SWOs don't believe that to be the case any more 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:10:41 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. Salvo from hell, which renders armor even less effective. Don't get hit. Strait. Straight is a poker hand Quote HistoryQuoted:
Originally Posted By Sylvan
Any enemy worth a fuck isn't going to have a first shot. Its going to be a salvo from hell. Staying power was still part of the equation along with defensive power. the other grumpy black shoe was very generous to give me a spare copy of Hughes' book. Which, along with Corbit and Mahan are my limit of knowledge. Yup. Salvo from hell, which renders armor even less effective. Don't get hit. Originally Posted By Sylvan
Kill your enemy before he kills you. But don't orbit a straight. we are going to get ass raped. Strait. Straight is a poker hand 
English isn't my strong sweet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:15:15 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
English isn't my strong sweet. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Strait. Straight is a poker hand
English isn't my strong sweet. Just want to make sure you have strait straight for any future articles 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:21:52 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Most SWOs don't believe that to be the case any more
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[ we salvaged cole and stark. so there is some level of survivability. how they would do against moderns? Don't know. It would appear the solution now is, "Don't get hit." Streetfighter, if I read it correctly, argued that isn't an option. We have too few ships, that are too expensive to have expendable ships. LCS isn't streetfighter. Can we get enough active defenses to counter? I don't think so. Ships are overweight now, agreed. The key is to kill your enemy before he kills you. If your enemy gets the first shot, defeat it and kill him while doing so. Same as it's always been. We just can't defeat his shot by absorbing it any more. Absolutely. When I was a DH, the First Commandment from 2nd Fleet was "Thou shalt not take the first hit." Most SWOs don't believe that to be the case any more
Then we are truly fucked. That thinking needs to be adjusted most rikki tik. Personally, I think it traces back to the Robo-cruiser and the Iranian airliner, and the resulting nonsense about radio warning to the effect of "You are approaching a U.S. Warship and are subject to United States defensive measures, blah, blah, blah." Just eats up your already short DTE time and gives a bad guy target confirmation, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:27:21 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What's the relationship between altitude and GPS jamming denial/degraded areas? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Assuming linear acceleration, M982 exiting a 200" M777 barrel at 827 m/s will be the same force as 1650 m/s out of an 800" long 16"/50 naval cannon. A base bleed projectile with that muzzle velocity should be able to reach ~100nmi And probably miss at the end. Either its dumb and you are doing some "how did the world begin" type math or its smart and its going to spoofed/jammed/or fooled just like a more effective ASCM I was refrencing this document. They say a 60kg projectile as pictured below will fly 100nmi if launched at 1,800m/s. They want to use coil guns to launch it, but I don't see why a 16"/50cal gun can't be re-purposed for it instead. I am willing to bet a scaled up 500lb guided version of this 132lb projectile would have greater reach due to a higher ballistic coefficient and the ability to glide rather than follow a purely ballistic path. And I was talking about land attack not anti-ship; if long range INS/GPS guidance isn't feasible for that, then I guess we should retire all the tomahawk missiles. http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c304/Zenmastur/Projectile/155mm60kgReferenceProjectile.jpg What's the relationship between altitude and GPS jamming denial/degraded areas? I really don't know; got any links to educate me? I would imagine that an antenna pointed up with a good front to back ratio would reject most of the noise from below. I suppose you could always datalink course correction updates from the ship and rely on just the INS after it falls under the horizon. In any case, I'm fairly confident this isn't a show-stopper since the LRLAP and Excalibur programs haven't been canceled yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:28:49 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Could we park one of these close enough to Syria to put the hurt on ISIS?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVvEPTYrcXA
Dport is gonna kill me but we should have kept this one on the register permanently. Just for how badass it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:29:31 PM EDT
[#13]
Excel really does not get GPS updates till it approaches the summit of its flight, until then it relies upon inertial guidance.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:30:52 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just want to make sure you have strait straight for any future articles Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Strait. Straight is a poker hand
English isn't my strong sweet. Just want to make sure you have strait straight for any future articles Ill just bring up the dutch absalon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:33:04 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Excel really does not get GPS updates till it approaches the summit of its flight, until then it relies upon inertial guidance. Higher you go the bigger the jamming footprint... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:43:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ill just bring up the dutch absalon. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Strait. Straight is a poker hand
English isn't my strong sweet. Just want to make sure you have strait straight for any future articles Ill just bring up the dutch absalon. Yeah. I can't talk about LCS anymore. Haven't seen you post in the Army PGS thread yet. Airpower and all |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 5:55:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not optimal for reasons I won't discuss. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Seems like a hellfire/brimstone launcher or laser guided Zuni would be the ticket. Not optimal for reasons I won't discuss. understatement 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 6:04:24 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This does tend to help mitigate the FIAC issue: http://www.msc.navy.mil/publications/pressrel/images/10835874305_5c1882499b_o.jpg http://www.msc.navy.mil/publications/pressrel/press13/press26.htm From that article: Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 6:44:22 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now Not until they finish training the sharks |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 7:25:16 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not until they finish training the sharks Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now Not until they finish training the sharks
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 9:07:55 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: From that article:
Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 9:10:35 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: From that article:
Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2014 9:42:12 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: From that article:
Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. <applause.gif> Those 7 words sum up half of the problem with the current acquisition system. The other half is that we allow Officers to retire and go to work for the companies developing the military projects the Officers previously managed while still serving . |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 2:17:11 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: From that article:
Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. Wait until the FEL comes on line.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 4:19:42 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wait until the FEL comes on line. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: From that article:
Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. Wait until the FEL comes on line. Lasers eventually - yes Lasers in 2015, no |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 8:19:22 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: From that article:
Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. Funding plans are done in 5 year cycles; you always brief cost over the Future (five) Year Defense Plan (FYDP) |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 9:25:06 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Funding plans are done in 5 year cycles; you always brief cost over the Future (five) Year Defense Plan (FYDP) Every find that study on best caliber for small boats? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2014 10:05:46 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Every find that study on best caliber for small boats? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Funding plans are done in 5 year cycles; you always brief cost over the Future (five) Year Defense Plan (FYDP) Every find that study on best caliber for small boats? Moved on from that job; the guys at SSP said they got a new share drive when I asked about the study |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 12:00:06 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Back to the SoH issue. Could you tether an aerostat on the Dubai point? THe rocks north of khasab? killing those little fuckers would seem to be secondary to simply identifying them in a timely manner as a threat. Been thinking about this more since I'm back to doing some FAC/FIAC stuff for the week. Putting an aerostat with a datalink can feed your radar picture, but that by itself isn't sufficient. Consider this from the perspective of doing COIN where there are armed individuals, militia factions, and uniformed military in a town. Some are there legally. Some are smugglers - lawbreakers for sure, but not necessarily worthy of military attention - just folks trying to make a living. Others are just protecting their homes, their town, their families. You can't tell who's who until you get really close. 4-5 miles (max range you can really start sorting what a radar contact is) for a ship that can see hundreds of miles is probably the equivalent of elbow bumping distance for you. BTW, your platoon, squad, whatever is armed primarily with MANPADS, Javelin, mortars, and pistols. You have a couple of rifles, but they only have 10 round magazines and it takes a long time to reload. DPort, DesertAIP, Josh, etc can weigh in here, but I'm trying to paint you a picture. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 12:32:48 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Been thinking about this more since I'm back to doing some FAC/FIAC stuff for the week. Putting an aerostat with a datalink can feed your radar picture, but that by itself isn't sufficient. Consider this from the perspective of doing COIN where there are armed individuals, militia factions, and uniformed military in a town. Some are there legally. Some are smugglers - lawbreakers for sure, but not necessarily worthy of military attention - just folks trying to make a living. Others are just protecting their homes, their town, their families. You can't tell who's who until you get really close. 4-5 miles (max range you can really start sorting what a radar contact is) for a ship that can see hundreds of miles is probably the equivalent of elbow bumping distance for you. BTW, your platoon, squad, whatever is armed primarily with MANPADS, Javelin, mortars, and pistols. You have a couple of rifles, but they only have 10 round magazines and it takes a long time to reload. DPort, DesertAIP, Josh, etc can weigh in here, but I'm trying to paint you a picture. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Back to the SoH issue. Could you tether an aerostat on the Dubai point? THe rocks north of khasab? killing those little fuckers would seem to be secondary to simply identifying them in a timely manner as a threat. Been thinking about this more since I'm back to doing some FAC/FIAC stuff for the week. Putting an aerostat with a datalink can feed your radar picture, but that by itself isn't sufficient. Consider this from the perspective of doing COIN where there are armed individuals, militia factions, and uniformed military in a town. Some are there legally. Some are smugglers - lawbreakers for sure, but not necessarily worthy of military attention - just folks trying to make a living. Others are just protecting their homes, their town, their families. You can't tell who's who until you get really close. 4-5 miles (max range you can really start sorting what a radar contact is) for a ship that can see hundreds of miles is probably the equivalent of elbow bumping distance for you. BTW, your platoon, squad, whatever is armed primarily with MANPADS, Javelin, mortars, and pistols. You have a couple of rifles, but they only have 10 round magazines and it takes a long time to reload. DPort, DesertAIP, Josh, etc can weigh in here, but I'm trying to paint you a picture. It was the coin comparison (I was thinking of the HOA example at the time) that got me into the streetfighter debate. You need long term presence and situational awareness. the faster you are, the more ground (sea) you can cover with the same element. LCS is fast. Aviation is faster. P3s are pretty good at this maritime patrol thing, but not optimal. On the ground side, if I have the surveillance assets available, I can cover a lot of ground and handle almost all my problems with a helo-born QRF of maybe company size. Like a full province in Afghanistan. On the navy side, MC-12 type aircraft with tucanos and some longer endurance planes could cover a lot of ocean, be fairly safe from manpads, and provide the requisite lethality. Again, going back to HOA (Dijibouti as a base, for example) Not everything compares, obviously, SoH are tight. But I'd be just as concerned with a salvo of land based ASCMs as FAC/FIACs. More so, perhaps, because of the lethality. ON land if you have a lethal choke point, you either own it or avoid it. Straights don't seem to give you either option (some are going around the Cape instead of going through the Suez). Factors. Range of identifying a threat Time for them to close to engage with their weapon system (may be zero) If the later is zero and their systems are small, hardening the target as opposed to killing the threat would be preferable. Would trophy work on a ship? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 12:53:23 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ON land if you have a lethal choke point, you either own it or avoid it. Straights don't seem to give you either option (some are going around the Cape instead of going through the Suez). Prehostilities you don't have that option. Once the fight is on... You can see why Turkey was important to NATO's interests in the Med. Straits. Straights are poker hands 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 3:37:02 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Prehostilities you don't have that option. Once the fight is on... You can see why Turkey was important to NATO's interests in the Med. Straits. Straights are poker hands
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
ON land if you have a lethal choke point, you either own it or avoid it. Straights don't seem to give you either option (some are going around the Cape instead of going through the Suez). Prehostilities you don't have that option. Once the fight is on... You can see why Turkey was important to NATO's interests in the Med. Straits. Straights are poker hands
god damnit Its the dutch spelling.
I am so going to fuck that up eventually. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 3:38:13 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
god damnit Its the dutch spelling.
I am so going to fuck that up eventually. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ON land if you have a lethal choke point, you either own it or avoid it. Straights don't seem to give you either option (some are going around the Cape instead of going through the Suez). Prehostilities you don't have that option. Once the fight is on... You can see why Turkey was important to NATO's interests in the Med. Straits. Straights are poker hands
god damnit Its the dutch spelling.
I am so going to fuck that up eventually. You know what else is straight? The shoulder thing that goes up. Is tomorrow a Pentagon day for you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 3:40:03 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know what else is straight? The shoulder thing that goes up. Is tomorrow a Pentagon day for you? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ON land if you have a lethal choke point, you either own it or avoid it. Straights don't seem to give you either option (some are going around the Cape instead of going through the Suez). Prehostilities you don't have that option. Once the fight is on... You can see why Turkey was important to NATO's interests in the Med. Straits. Straights are poker hands
god damnit Its the dutch spelling.
I am so going to fuck that up eventually. You know what else is straight? The shoulder thing that goes up. Is tomorrow a Pentagon day for you? I think so. Today is my last day of 2 weeks of burning use or lose. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 3:42:49 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think so. Today is my last day of 2 weeks of burning use or lose. I have a 1015-1215 in OSD spaces tomorrow. I'd offer to buy you lunch tomorrow, but since my last trip back from DC took 5 hours and I need to get my dog from boarding by 1800, that's out. Coffee before the meeting is possible. I just need time (20-30 minutes) to find this conference room - it's a new meeting location for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 3:54:30 PM EDT
[#36]
PM Sent.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 4:01:54 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: From that article:
Also in 2014, Ponce will receive the first operational installation of the Navy's Laser Weapon System (LaWS). LaWS uses a solid state infrared beam to defend the ship by destroying or crippling swarming boats and unmanned aerial vehicle attacks. It demonstrates the Navy's ability to quickly deliver advanced capability to forward deployed forces and leadership in fielding directed energy technologies. Is the LaWS germane to the discussion here? Never heard of it before now The Chief's Mess will use it to change the channels on their ex-wives tvs from the other side of the planet. Very useful. In 5 years it will be awesome. Why 5 years? Because acquisition tours are 4 years long. So true. Never be the second Program Manager (aka the Bag Holder). |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 4:24:33 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have a 1015-1215 in OSD spaces tomorrow. I'd offer to buy you lunch tomorrow, but since my last trip back from DC took 5 hours and I need to get my dog from boarding by 1800, that's out. Coffee before the meeting is possible. I just need time (20-30 minutes) to find this conference room - it's a new meeting location for me. 2 hours of Powerpoint? F...............k. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 10:46:42 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
2 hours of Powerpoint? F...............k. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I have a 1015-1215 in OSD spaces tomorrow. I'd offer to buy you lunch tomorrow, but since my last trip back from DC took 5 hours and I need to get my dog from boarding by 1800, that's out. Coffee before the meeting is possible. I just need time (20-30 minutes) to find this conference room - it's a new meeting location for me. 2 hours of Powerpoint? F...............k. This one won't be bad. It's the coordination meeting for the Flag steering committee that goes down in two weeks. That one will suck, although somebody usually says something really interesting. At least tomorrow I'll do more than sit along the wall trying to look interested seeing everything for the third time
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2014 10:47:28 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
PM Sent. PM received and response sent. Maybe next time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 7:45:42 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: snip On the navy side, MC-12 type aircraft with tucanos and some longer endurance planes could cover a lot of ocean, be fairly safe from manpads, and provide the requisite lethality. Again, going back to HOA (Dijibouti as a base, for example) snip At this point I feel like you're just establishing yourself to be an Embraer sale rep.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 7:57:14 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL really? At this point I feel like you're just establishing yourself to be an Embraer sale rep.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
snip On the navy side, MC-12 type aircraft with tucanos and some longer endurance planes could cover a lot of ocean, be fairly safe from manpads, and provide the requisite lethality. Again, going back to HOA (Dijibouti as a base, for example) snip At this point I feel like you're just establishing yourself to be an Embraer sale rep.
Its just the most viable option. Most of the real pilots have convinced me twin engine is preferred for any number of reasons, but Boeing stopped development of the OV-10X and the Casa 235/295 gunship is a bit of overkill. For low cost maritime patrolling, it might be a good solution which could combine the ISR of the MC-12 with the lethality of a LAAR in one platform. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 8:19:57 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Could we park one of these close enough to Syria to put the hurt on ISIS? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVvEPTYrcXA
No, because ISIS is protected from naval shelling by Sir Isaac Newton. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 8:22:27 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Its just the most viable option. Most of the real pilots have convinced me twin engine is preferred for any number of reasons, but Boeing stopped development of the OV-10X and the Casa 235/295 gunship is a bit of overkill. For low cost maritime patrolling, it might be a good solution which could combine the ISR of the MC-12 with the lethality of a LAAR in one platform. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: snip On the navy side, MC-12 type aircraft with tucanos and some longer endurance planes could cover a lot of ocean, be fairly safe from manpads, and provide the requisite lethality. Again, going back to HOA (Dijibouti as a base, for example) snip At this point I feel like you're just establishing yourself to be an Embraer sale rep. Its just the most viable option. Most of the real pilots have convinced me twin engine is preferred for any number of reasons, but Boeing stopped development of the OV-10X and the Casa 235/295 gunship is a bit of overkill. For low cost maritime patrolling, it might be a good solution which could combine the ISR of the MC-12 with the lethality of a LAAR in one platform. eta- Other posters here would be able to expound on that though if they want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 12:40:19 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its just the most viable option. Care to share the data on which you base this assessment? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 12:42:26 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Care to share the data on which you base this assessment? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Its just the most viable option. Care to share the data on which you base this assessment? Available and in use. What else is out there in armed turbo props? AT-6? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 12:48:07 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Available and in use. What else is out there in armed turbo props? AT-6? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its just the most viable option. Care to share the data on which you base this assessment? Available and in use. What else is out there in armed turbo props? AT-6? How about just a list of your entering assumptions that you used to come to that conclusion. I'll start: 1. An aviation platform is the most viable option |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 12:56:41 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about just a list of your entering assumptions that you used to come to that conclusion. I'll start: 1. An aviation platform is the most viable option Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its just the most viable option. Care to share the data on which you base this assessment? Available and in use. What else is out there in armed turbo props? AT-6? How about just a list of your entering assumptions that you used to come to that conclusion. I'll start: 1. An aviation platform is the most viable option fair enough. I keep forgetting with aviation assets comes pilots. Then it all goes to hell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 1:00:44 PM EDT
[#49]
To answer your point.
Able to observe large areas of littoral areas, safety against common threat small arms and missiles, lethality against small boats, cost efficient and available. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2014 1:37:28 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To answer your point. Able to observe large areas of littoral areas, safety against common threat small arms and missiles, lethality against small boats, cost efficient and available. Those are your criteria, right? Not assumptions and not data. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
