Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "Task & Purpose" channel.

  1. There is no doubt that USAF started working on the B-21 right after the B-2 was completed Commonly that how it goes, they keep rolling from program to program so when the contract becomes official they are already ahead of the game
    90
  2. The CM-32 takes advantage of the fact that China's ability to land hand heavy armor is very limited so medium to light armor they can land can be easily dealt with a 105mm gun
    61
  3. What Ukarine has shown is that armor without protection and support is basically useless The US military has heavily invested in protection and support to make sure that its armor doesn't get shredded as easily as Russia tanks
    44
  4.  @somedudeonline-i3t  Lay off the potato their ivan China likes to say DF-21 and DF-26 but fail mention that CVNs can easily operate outside their range and still strike China and its ship When you fire DF-21 and DF-26s at CVN, long range works for the US because in order for missiles to stay on target, require constant updating By jamming their communication, its harder for China to control missile and even harder for it to stay on target DFs are over 30,000lbs in weight. Thats 15 tons of material per missile, can only use them sparely As for Russia Ukraine has already shown enough about the Knzhal that no one is worried about it and has even fewer assets able to use ZIrcons As for the US the US has several defenses options in work but the most substantial is testing F-18s as missile carriers with SM-6s An air launch SM-6s would give the US a massive advantage in countering missiles using aircraft
    38
  5. The F-117 proved the concept of stealth can work and also proved the limitations of stealth
    34
  6. No, Ukraine is showing the superiority of the Apache to Russian gunships 3 simple facts First, the Apache is designed to carry the longbow radar. The longbow allows to the Apache to search for target with minimal exposure The KA-52 has to fully unmask completely to search for targets as its radar is mounted in the nose This allows the enemy to spot them easier One Apache can act as sensors while others as shooters. Secondly The Hellfire missile thanks to constant operations has undergone several upgrades The newer models be can launched while the Apache is still in concealed position again minimal exposure when engaging targets The videos of KA-52s and others have all been running and gunning with unguided weapons. Apache is designed to strike precisionly Note that when the KA-52 started using LMUR and striking more precisely, their effectiveness went up Lastly, the Apache has advance datalinks that allow the view real time video from UAV as well as the ability to control them UAVs can push ahead and look for potential threats ahead of the Apaches Also remember that Apache has the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) plus 6 other options for precision kits for its 70mm rockets Those kits allow the Apache to engage more targets precisely and preserve the Hellfire for high value targets The only things that the Apache need for future combat is EOTS/IR/Longbow combination in the mast so the Apache passive view targets as EW is advancing to where the enemy may be able to detect its radar emission and longer range and speed
    28
  7. Thats not surprising that there some disagree but ultimately you have realize that 5.56mm has gone as far as it could go
    20
  8. Ukraine having Patriot, NASAMS and IRIS-T is why you dont see the Su-57 trying its luck The Patriot already embarrassed the Kinzhal Russia sending its Su-57 against the Patriot and it getting smoked in the process would be a massive humiliation For them, its not worth the risk especially when so far Su-57s are operational
    17
  9.  @Patson20  I wouldnt say that The USMC has made some smart calls recently as well no so smart ones but they are getting there The F-35B needs an cruise missiles with 300 mile and 500lbs warhead that can be carried internally The ACV needs 105mm heavy guns variant The Corps needs to adopt the Spike NLOS for the Cobra as well as Tomcar 8 pack launcher that can be carried internally by the CH-53K Lastly, they need to sit down with the Army and agree on either the Archer or RCH 155s as Ukraine has shown that Towed arty is too vulnerable now
    14
  10. One quick point Them capturing a few Javelins is just water in the bucket The US supplied Ukraine forces with fully expecting at some point some missiles would be captures The Lockheed and Raytheon are currently working on FGM-148G which is new completely new system The Ukraine forces were likely give block 0 Javelin so Russia forces capturing them is moot
    14
  11. Russia's losses with the KA-52 and Mi-28 are due to tactics and weapons Every video of the Apache we see is it striking precisely 9/10 of ten times from stand off range With Ka-52 and Mi-28s its been running and gunning with 30mm cannons and unguided rockets Basically making themselves easy targets for MANPADs
    12
  12. If the US was attacking EA-18G would be suppressing while F-16CJ with HARMs knocks out the Panstir S-1 and Tunguska with 4 F-15Es loaded with 28 GBU-53s or 15 GBU-38s for the initial attack with 4 A-10s for the secondary attack with F-22s in top cover All in All The US would end that convoy in under a hour or less
    11
  13.  @maxmagnus777  The issue here is that Russia APS as well as made lofty claims about its tanks "During a reported test conducted by the Russian military in 1999 the T-90 was exposed to a variety of RPG, ATGM and APFSDS munitions. When equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA the T-90 could not be penetrated by any of the APFSDS or ATGM used during the trial" Yet Russia armor is getting smashed with ease
    11
  14. Not really North Korea despite all its blustering , wouldnt but last a few days. South Korea has some key weapons that would blunt NK forces First SK has the Spike NLOS mounted on Sand Cats. That are many ways to hurt NK with that. Additionally they also have ATACMS But most important and nightmarish is the F-15E North Korea prizes itself on number and F-15E can easily thin those numbers out
    11
  15.  @Taskandpurpose  France in reality can perform a limited scope strike and bring things to screech halt in Ukraine The Rafale lacks similar capability to the AGM-88 but a dozen Rafales carrying Storm Shadows can simultaneously strike key targets and E-2 guiding Rafales with Meteors can take the tables on Russian aircraft I can see Ukraine exposing the Rafale's short comings and France buying weapons from the US to make up for it
    11
  16. Well interesting to see how this plays out
    10
  17. Fortunately for the Army, the Marine Corps will be there to do all the heavy lifting
    10
  18.  @CheekyMenace  No the F-117 was a lot of lessons for the USAF The F-117 was designed for maximum stealth so it lacked a lot EW and ECM the F-22 and F-35s has It also highlighted the USAF/USN shortcomings with SEAD Serbian defense survived because the AGM-88 at the time could only home on actively transmitting radar The newer models of the AGM-88 can home even if the target is cold. Additionally it can track moving targets as well target items beside the radar The EA-18G has datalink so it can transmit target info to closer assets. Thanks to better targeting pods technology, those assets can engage targets up close and at long range Both stealth and SEAD has advanced a lot from the F-117s lessons
    9
  19. 55 tons for AFV/IFV way too much they need to keep between 20-30 tons C-17s can carry one 70 Abrams or two 30 ton Bradleys or three 18 ton Stykers At 55 tons, you would be depending more on C-5s for air borne lifting than C-17s and considering the USAF only has 52 C-5s vs 200 plus C-17 thats seems like digging yourself into a hole 30 to 40 tons is far better range
    9
  20. if the Su-57 is sign of Russia's capability then their 6th will be that much funnier The PAK FA/ Su-57 has been a giant nothing burger The US developed the technology, then built to prototype and push production Russia built the prototype, pushed production and then developed the technology The problem for Russia is that the technology they were trying to develop took longer than they expected So long that program went from credible to a joke over time
    9
  21. Russia doesnt want to try its luck
    8
  22. Not exactly correct. The TB2 is highly mobile system. The command truck is mobile and the drone it self can be carried on trailer Realistically, all you need is 3 trucks to support it. the command truck, one carry fuel and parts and one carry weapons and additional equipment Now truth be told, its mobililty comes at the cost of payload but tactics can work around that
    8
  23. Given their enemies are supplied with ATGMs, you need something like the Namer that well armored and to take a beating Plus sharing parts with the Merkava makes it very cost effective to operate
    8
  24. Submarines remain the carriers and surface ships one true problem but we are starting to see the first generation of hard kill torpedo defenses Hitting a torpedo with another torpedo is the easy part. The problem is that sensors are not accurate enough yet to distinguish between ocean and torpedo Active sonar can easily do so but keep ing active sonar on is like ringing the dinner bell says come and get it. So the trick is passive system able to distinguish between ocean and torpedo so active sonar use limited to targeting similar to aircraft. Only used when they need to lock on Newer torpedo likes subs are getting quieter but it can be done
    8
  25.  @Birdylockso  More like highly unlikely Carriers are moving targets In order to hit a moving target, its seeker has to lock on which is first vulnerability Jamming the missile itself In order to counter, the missile has data link which allows China to put the missile on the right target which again goes back to jamming communication so its datalink can't be used In order to counter, China equips the missile with Digital Scene Matching Area Correlator (DSMAC) which has picture of CVN and missile seeker looks for the CVN The CVN uses smoke generators to conceal itself On the US side The USN is testing SM-6s carried by F-18s F-18s carrying a pair SM-6s would be able intercept hypersonic long before they reach the fleet
    8
  26. The key for Ukrainian forces is if the US supplies them with TOW-2B which is the top attack variant of the TOW If they get the TOW-2B, it will be bad day for any Russian armor going to toe to toe with Bradley
    8
  27. Its simple First ,Ukraine is taking the fight to them. Second, Russia is less likely to use the full force of its weapons on its own soil. The third and most important road to Moscow is Kursk, Oryol , Tula How much of a flex would it be for Ukraine to lay siege on Moscow While Moscow would easily defend against it, the fact that Ukraine was able to penetrate their territory to deeply and reach Moscow would be a massive propaganda victory for Ukraine and massive humanization for Putin
    7
  28.  @AyOuB.God-soldier  The Javelin costs more but you also get more with the Javelin The Javelin has multi-purpose warhead (MPWH) which can be used in any model A through F. The MPWH has both anti-material and anti-personnel capability in one missile whereas the Kornet needs multiple missiles to engage various targets. So if you have Kornet with HEAT loaded but are suddenly faced with personnel You either need to unload and load Thermobaric or Blast Fragmentation or have another launcher loaded Thermobaric or Blast Fragmentation Whereas the Javelin can simply engage the threat without having to change missiles Second the Javelin has soft launch capability which allows to be fired from enclosed spaces , The Kornet can't be fired from an enclosed space They can literally open up window and shoot. As the missile is soft launch, its harder for the enemy to track it launch position but most importantly, the Javelin is fire and forget. An ATGM can immediately displace whereas the Kornet has to remain stationary So those 29 missiles in the end can't do much
    7
  29. If Army was smarter, this could have been wheeled and weighed considerably less The Stryker MGS was a good idea but poorly executed Instead of scrapping the MGS, they should have looked at the Japanese Type 16 MCV only weights 26 tons ,105mm with 40 rounds Very easy to adopt the design
    7
  30.  @luigimrlgaming9484  The B-52 continued service is due to massive cancellations with the B-1 and B-2 The B-1 original was supposed to be 240 planes, the B-1B ended up with only 100 The B-2 was supposed to be 165 planes , ended up with only 21 The USAF between 1954 and 1963 received 742 B-52s Because the B-1 and B-2 were never deployed in significant numbers The USAF had to successively upgrade the G and H to maintain a credible bomber force The B-52 low speed, hefty payload and long range has proven to be incredibly flexible for modern warfare Ironically, the B-1 is great for time sensitive missions, the B-2 against advanced defenses or mission whereas stealth is needed The B-52 is good for pretty much everything else The mix of the 3 have been very useful but still expensive
    7
  31. They want the F-22 as test bed for NGAD tech
    7
  32. Tawian has number of MIM-72 Chaparrals with AIM-9s and Avengers with Stingers for countering an aerial invasion The CM-32 with 105mm takes advantage of the fact that China has extremely limited resources for landing heavy armor by air What China armor can deliver by air is easily dealt with by 105mm. Even if the paratroopers are armed with ATGMs, without armor or air support, they wont last long Tawain can simply box them in and pound them with arty Tawian has a lot highly mobile air defense just for denying China an air assault
    6
  33. The Namer is an excellent transport but at 60 plus tonnes, thats hard to move around the battlefield
    6
  34. The B-21 does not sacrifice anything You forgetting what weapons have greatly advanced which reduces the need for bombers to carry massive payloads Air launched cruise missiles have gotten lighter and longer range The AGM-86C weighed 3150lbs carrying 1200lbs warhead 700 miles The AGM-158 weighs 2250 carrying 1000lbs warhead 600 miles Other weapons have also gotten lighter as well
    6
  35.  @marcopalazzo9349  The critical assets that US provided to the UK which was key in them retaking the Falklands was 2 million gallons of fuel and access to US SATCOM The UK had no assets able to deliver the fuel needed to support their operations, the US diverting a supertanker allows them to refuel both ships and aircraft allowing the UK to conduct sustained operations without having to worry about fuel. Access to US SATCOM allowed the UK to better coordinate with their assets in the area allow the UK to have a much more effective battle plan Because they communicate were able their subs in real time, it allowed the HMS Conqueror to sink General Belgrano which in turn caused the Argentine Navy port their carrier ARA Veinticinco de Mayo. That allowed the UK have to complete naval supremacy Without those two assets UK would have never retook the Falklands
    5
  36.  @angelmario7085  Again goes back to the lofty claims Russia claims that its EW can neutralize UAV, yet its not happening Russia claims that its upgraded Pansitr , Tor, and Tunguska can deal with UAV, again not happeniing Mobile gun systems like the Tunguska should be able to down UAV with its 30mm cannons but again not happening?
    5
  37.  @Birdylockso  The Asia times seriously In 2016 SM-6 Dual I missiles launched from USS John Paul Jones (DDG-53) against a “complex, medium-range ballistic missile target” at the Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF), Kauai, Hawaii. As far back as 2015, the USN has been testing the SM-6 against complex threats Second The SM-6 missile uses an explosive warhead to defeat ballistic missile threats, differing from other missile defense interceptors, such as the Standard Missile-3, which use non-explosive hit-to-kill technology” read the MDA statement. The SM-6 carries 140lbs warhead so it doesnt need to be hit to kill it just need to get close enough
    5
  38. The winner will be the first one that puts an EO/IR/AESA mast on their aircraft Just as the longbow does sneak and peak with the radar, the EO/IR/AESA mast would allow to do the same without RF emissions modern vehicles are being equipped with SAL and RWR which allow them to detect laser and radar targeting An EO/IR capability in the mast allows it passive track without giving away its position till it fires It also allow to coordinate attacks with Apaches As Apaches are using the longer range SPIKE NLOS The FARA could attack as spotter, providing battle damage assessment or terminal guidance If the Army adds in the right capability like EO/IR/AESA it will pay major dividends in the long run for them
    5
  39.  @midgetman4206  That would be false about the F-35 interchangeability. The original goal was close to 80 percent , however its closer to 30-50 percent. Engines, radar, cockpit and sensors are the same, the major differences is the air frame The problem with the F-35 program is the A and C. The F-35B was always to going to be different from the rest. The problem is that F-35A and F-35C ended up being too far apart The only difference between the A and C should have been landing gear , strength air frame for carrier operations and folding wings Instead they specialized the F-35C too much The F-35A has more in common with the F-35B than the F-35C The common sense thing would be roll the FARA and FLRAA into one program and take a few pages from fixed wing aircraft Targeting pod allow aircraft to guide precision munitions but can also function as ISR The solution for rolling the FARA and FLRAA into would be removable equipment or fixed equipment an EO/IR/AESA That can function for both attack and ISR Instead of having two aircraft you have one, that you can equip with ISR equipment as needed or configured for strike missions
    5
  40.  @tainechen1634  The whole point of Taiwan getting hardened bunkers and highly mobile assets is for that exactly reason Secondly their strikes doesnt change the fact that one solider with MANPAD can easily bring done Y-20
    5
  41. Tankers are relatively safe now The newer generations of to air to air missiles seekers are sensitive and accurate enough to target incoming missiles like the R-37, PL-15 and PL-21 When you have F-15EXs with CFTs and 22 AIM-120DFR3/AXE or AIM-260 paired with powerful radar and networked with AWACS The threat to tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR assets is greatly reduce Lockheed has also delivered laser weapon for aircraft With the advent of all that tech Protecting assets is much easier to do and harder for the enemy
    4
  42.  @oskrm  Russia's saving grace is that Ukraine did not get JAS-39 If they had Gripen, they could easily decimate that convoy Russia knows the US capabilities and would never leave a convoy open like against the US as it would be eaten alive Russia knows Ukraine's capabilities and knows they lack the ability to destroy completely, the best they can do is peck away at it Ukraine's Su-25 are extremely limited on what they can do The MIG-29s Poland is giving are not optimized for multi role only the MIG-29M and later models Same with the Su-27 again not optimized for multi role
    4
  43. its paper tiger for a reason
    4
  44. MRAPs have certainly become the mainstay of military protected vehicles
    4
  45.  @cgilby9925  Your comment asks the major question about Russia's touted EW capability From the understanding, it should be able to jam the drones or geo locate it so aircraft can attack the site but neither is happening
    4
  46.  @douginorlando6260  How about no
    4
  47. The Brahmos doesnt have range or flexibility of the Typhon
    4
  48. No, its simple limitations The Swedish Archer Artillery System and German Pzh-2000 are the fastest 155mm systems in use Even with extended range munitions that get their range out 40 miles, At the end of the day, they are limited by range and ability to be in position When artillery is there and in position, its preferred simplly because it only takes minutes With JDAM ,it depends on what assets are available on station Ukraine is showing the limitation of 155mm and mortars and shows why air support so important
    4
  49. Its not about range its about armor Body armor has become common place and easy to get for basically anyone 5.56 rounds are ineffective 7.62 is slowly becoming ineffective 50 cal will penetrate any body armor as well light to medium armored vehicles but 50 weapons are extremely heavy 338 is a happy medium because its powerful enough to defeat armor and damage light armor but still light enough to be carried by squad level on down
    4
  50. The TB2 has proven itself as potent weapon in the Ukraine conflict due to its light weight and high mobility but that comes at the cost of payload The MQ-9 definitely makes tanks obsolete due to its considerable payload and available weapons
    4
  51. Tactically speaking that doesn't matter Ukraine is what is known as a target rich environment so there is plenty to chose from Russian forward operating bases where personnel and equipment are targets. Dropping a HIMARS missile where personnel sleep it brutal but effective vehicles have to be parked somewhere. Staging areas .convoys Russian bases where KA-52, MI-28 and MI-35s are targets. S-300/400 sites, EW and other air defense assets also targets Even if they pull their logistics back , there is still plenty of material targets to chose from
    4
  52.  @homeonegreen9  Ships are not as important for littoral combat as they were in WW2 The aircraft like the CH-53K and MV-22 can perform resupply from long range. The US military has been looking at the Japanese ShinMaywa US-2 floatplane Resupplying isnt the issue , its defenses from ships, subs and aircraft While the Patriot is capable, its also requires a lot effort to move and set up The USMC needs a defense system able to deal with modern threats but still flexible enough to move quickly
    4
  53. I say no for field use per say. There is too much that can go wrong with a system like that on the battlefield Secondly, the gunner is now carrying a lot weight in ammo in addition to his equipment The A-Gunner role is more than being a mule for ammo. For personnel defending a base, its perfect because they allow them to bring overwhelming firepower and its easier to deal with problems versus trying to deal with problems in the middle of a fire fight Ultimately the best thing to do is improve ammo carriage for M240 and M249 similiar to what the Russian PKM uses and balance out the platoon with M27s While the M240/M249 are reloading or dealing with stoppages, the M27 can maintain the rate of fire
    4
  54. Ukrainian forces have captured Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s Thats base models to the latest upgraded version All those tanks weapons, armor and sensors have all been compromised. Additionally, Ukrainian forces know all blind shots and weak spots for Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s so its not looking good for Russian armor
    4
  55. Drones are not a problem if you are prepared for them What the USMC and Army need to do is buy or build Germany's Rheinmetall BOXER Skyranger 30 air defence system mounted on Stryker and ACV for dealing with drones back with Stingers For larger targets the Humvee with AIM-9X and AIM-120C5 Thats being reactive but the US is proactive What the US would is strike the drones before they can be used Thanks to lessons in Iraq and Afghan plus Ukraine Using EW assets to locate targets is very easy to do
    4
  56.  @marcusgarvey7588  How about no For starters All USN subs carry TLAM cruise missiles, so attack the surface ships does not stop TLAMs from raining down on Iran Secondly Israel would allow USAF bombers to operate from its bases USAF bombers can also operate 3100 miles away at Diego Garica Lastly ,the odds of Iran's missile successfully attack are zero Defensively, the USN ships have mulitple ways of counter Iran's attack
    4
  57.  @dianapennepacker6854  The AH-1Z isnt at the Apache's level but it does has the room to grow One key feature of the AH-1Z is that it can use AIM-9s which the Apache can't do Now the confusion is over the USMC wants to test the AH-1Z with AIM-120s and F-35 as sensor/shooter test Which if adopted would give AH-1Z very unique capabilites but its a test not fat yet
    4
  58. Thats true but at the end of the day, the shot down was still the greatest gift for the USAF First, F-117 was designed for maximum stealth and lacked MAWS, RWR and ECM. That brought about the development of ow-probability-of-intercept MAWS and RWR for stealth aircraft. Allowing them to have protection that doesnt betray their positions Second, SEAD operations were highly ineffective against mobile units. The AGM-88 at the time could home on actively transmitting targets. F-16CJ had speed and weapons but was limited by HARM targeting system ability to locate targets. EA-6B had weapons and sensors but lacked speed. Their ability to locate and identify targets as well communicate with other assets was another issue The EA-18G solves all those issues and can locate targets far more effectivelly and the newer models of the AGM-88 can home on targets even if they are cold or moving Lastly, Strike aircraft could not locate targets due to forest and weather as well couldnt communicate with the SEAD aircraft. All aircraft have advanced targeting pods,newer radars allowing for true all weather capability and datalinks so communication between aircraft is substantially faster Losing the F-117 ,justified the USAF/USN/USMC spending on key programs
    4
  59. Its only going to get worst for Russia
    4
  60. Ukraine has all but confirmed that the next variant of the JDAM will have the GBU-53 seeker Anti-jam/anti-spoof GPS capability is good but if the seeker can switch from GPS to MMW or IR homing there is no jamming that Ironically Electro-Optical guided weapons will also be returning IR and Electro-Optical are much harder to jam because they are completely passive
    3
  61.  @paghilumdihauy  The Su-57 is 5th gen but by standards its between 4+++ gen and 5th gen The needle for 5th is barely moving Its the same as KAI KF-21 Boramae
    3
  62.  @CheekyMenace  The B-21 isnt about stealth The B-21 is about functionality B-2 is stealthy but expensive B-1 is fast but drinks fuel B-52 has great versatility but its very old How do you take their best qualities but still make a bomber for modern and future warfare Sure there are some lessons from the F-117s
    3
  63. Good thinking but not what is needed What Ukraine needs is to make systems similiar the USMC Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) and Long Range Missile (LMSL) A highly mobile launcher carrying a long range missile Like HIMARS but lighter and more mobile Ukraine needs a missile able to strike targets 500 miles plus carrying least 1000lbs warhead
    3
  64. They are making due with what they have And thats ironic that Ukraine sub par equipment is still doing very well
    3
  65. How about no ZOV24-2-22 FPV drones are working in Ukraine because both sides are ill equipped to deal with tme There are a few solutions to the FPV issue however one that is gaining traction is upgrading active protection system (APS) with additional launchers with programmable airburst round either low velocity HEDP 40mm rounds or high velocity 30mm AHEAD rounds so adding the new features to the existing assets allow them to test options for counter drones Second, the US wouldnt have Ukraine problems in a conflict Russian forces are caught unaware 90 percent of the time US forces have Joint Battle Command-Platform (PM JBC-P) which is carried by all forces and can be equipped even to HMWVVs For battle management and airborne ground surveillance . the USAF used the E-8 JSTARS giving forces on ground real time info on enemy movement Even though the USAF retired it, the US Army has been allowed to buy a replacement for it While Russia doesnt take SEAD/DEAD seriously The US has EA-18G, F-16CJ, EC-130H ,Rivet Joint and Combat Sent as well as E/A-37 in RD and the bulk of US aircraft can use the AGM-88., ADM-141 and ADM-160s The US has a whole arsenal devoted to destruction of enemy defenses and also thanks to Iraq and Afghn, Electronic warfare sensors are far more precise Lastly, the US wrote the book on drone warfare with the MQ-1 and MQ-9 As the US takes SEAD/DEAD seriously, Ukraine wouldnt have SAMs to target aircraft and the US would have its airborne ground surveillance , AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft opening with impunity
    3
  66. its not just bigger ,just better
    3
  67. The US is not adopting the 130mm yet as the analysis of the T-90M is ongoing The reason why EU is adopting 130mm is depleted uranium DU is banned in the EU and they only used tungsten alloy rounds which they deemed inadequate again the T-90M and T-14 Tungsten alloy can achieve DU levels of penetration but its as effect not DU. The US has no such ban and uses DU because its qualities DU is naturally self sharpening which means it does not blunt out as badly as tungsten alloy does against composite armor Russian ERA is designed to snap armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding sabot rounds. DU doesn't break as easily as tungsten alloy DU is pyrophoric which means it self ignites and burns at extremely high temps. Even if the round does not penetrate, the burning metal is still problem Thanks to Germany and Ukraine, the US has had Russian ERA enough that they discovered by increasing the mass and diameter of the M829s round it literally smashed through Russian ERA with relative ease hence why the M829 have gotten progressively heavier increasing the mass and diameter with tungsten alloy with 120mm rounds gets penetration but not a killing blow like DU By increasing to 130mm , the tungsten alloy rounds have the mass and speed needed for one hit knock out Another factor to consider is that 120mm rounds like the LAHAT and K-STAM-II can perform top attacks against armor
    3
  68. If you look at what the Ukrainian forces had before the West supplied them, they would not have been as successful They had all hand me downs from the USSR days Now they have top tier weapons
    3
  69. The simple answer is yes Ukrainian forces have captured Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s Thats base models to the latest upgraded version All those tanks weapons, armor and sensors have all been compromised. Additionally, Ukrainian forces know all blind shots and weak spots for Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s Its very easy for the AMX-10 to shred Russian armor as Ukrainian forces know everything about Russian tanks
    3
  70. As for as China and Russia catching up not likely The US has had a lot of experience thanks to Balkans, Middle Easy and Afghan to make the improvements for the B-21 Russia had limited operations and China zero
    3
  71. There is no doubt that the TOW did everything they said but truth be told, its been time to replace with more modern system The smart thing would be upgrade the Javelin similar to how Israel did with its Spike missile One missile able to cover a wide range of capabilities from boots on ground to helicopters
    3
  72.  @goodlife6277  The NAMER has Trophy APS so no kabom
    3
  73.  @goodlife6277  A Kornet, Krishantema, Konkurs, among others strangely MIA in Ukraine
    3
  74.  @kmrtnsn  True the M777 can be carried by air but in potential fight with China, they are a liability A normal set up 2 mins with x amount of time for the mission an 2 min to displaces so nominally between 6-10 minutes The Archer needs 20 seconds to set up. 1-2 minutes for the mission and displace in 20 so nominally 3-4 minutes In Ukraine virtually no Pzh-2000 and Archer have been lost because of their ability to rapidly shoot and scoot Slower SPG have been lost because of their manual loading and time between shoots
    3
  75.  @Stumpy1234  Thats 105mm not 155mm
    3
  76.  @chrissmith7669  Incorrect The KA-52s getting smoke because they are placing themselves well in range of the enemy weapons The video showing KA-52 getting smoked by ATGM is again them getting too close
    3
  77. The US didnt buy it, that was just for Ukraine While MANPADs are good , Ukraine needs longer range systems
    3
  78.  @Birdylockso  The other issue with DF is that they are over 15 tons in weight, in short massive targets So whats stopping F-18s and F-35s from destroying them The F-35s uses stealth an sensors to locate the launcher as sensor Then sends the data to F-18s which in its role as the shooter launches missiles against it The F-35 can also send data to other assets for targeting the launcher China problem is that putting up planes works for the USAF and USN favor As for Russia's Kinzhal and Zircon Same issue jamming and targeting launching asset The Kinzhal can be launched from over 1000 miles but the USN can easily jam comn between the missile and launching asset The USN needs to make the SM-6 from F-18 a reality
    3
  79.  @amc3463  The aircraft they need is the Swedish JAS-39 it can perform air to air carrying 7 AIM-120s or Meteors For attacking that convoy ,it can carry up to 16 GBU-39s For attacking the S-400, it can use the KEPD-350 Sweden designed it for force dispersal. It can land on road and only needs 6 vehicles with trailers to support it
    3
  80.  @Ormusn2o  Not likely
    3
  81. No In conflict, the F-35 with neutralize the enemy radar and communications use GBU-53 and SiAW while the NGAD dealt with fighters and AWACS One flight of F-15EX would carry hypersonic weapons for time sensitive targets SAM sites,, Another would be loaded with JDAMs so once the enemy is robbed of its defense, they would have clear skies to do what they need Example, its easier to just pound a ship in port with a 2000lbs JDAM than expend multi mill dollar LRASM Same with attacking enemy airfield ,2 F-15EX loaded with eight 2000lbs JDAM would be render the enemy runways uses while another pair with sixteen 500lbs JDAM each destroy pretty much everything else and last flight would carry JASSM-ER for striking additional targets That frees up the B-21 for strategic targets Ideally the USAF would have USN EA-18G supporting them keeping the enemy in dark
    3
  82. Facts
    3
  83.  @smilingpolitely12345  The F-16s does not to engage the RUAF in the air The F-16s precision strike capability is where it will hurt Russian forces the most The Black Sea Fleet can only be target when in range or in port The F-16 with Harpoon ASM can easily take the Black Sea Fleet completely out of the picture. Now the US can do Ukraine a solid and give them a few JASSM-A as well wire F-16s to for Storm Shadow as well possible use with KEDP-350s Instead of a few Su-24, all the F-16 can use ASM and ALCM No need to dog fight
    3
  84.  @vaultsjan  The S-400 missile is range 250 miles and S-300 is 120 its very easy for the F-16 to work Ukraine strike S-400 with modified R-360 hence why they were able to pound Crimea repeatedly last month so rinse and repeat but also remember that while MIG-29s and Su-27 can only the AGM-88 at fraction of its capability, the F-16 can fully use it
    3
  85.  @greysheeum  There are no other reasons if the mission doesnt call for it its not used Secondly the Apache's datalink allows for one Apache with long bow to act as the sensor for rest Additional the Apache second mast attachment is the Manned-Unmanned Teaming-Extended (MUMT-X). In others, the mast mount is being test for items other than the longbow radar The last item is EOTS/IR similar to the OH-58 The whole point of the Apache getting various mast options is prove that it can do the job of the OH-58 with little other than swapping out equipment
    3
  86.  @Studio23Media  The F-15 still uses federated systems while the F-22 uses software defined There things that F-15 can test but lack of software defined makes it harder to test much more complicated tech
    3
  87. They are trying to recycle old tech for the Abrams X I don't see them adopting everything The improved situation awareness, power pack and 30mm yes Everything else is very much Iffy
    2
  88. Not exactly Russia's problem in the Ukraine comes down to several factors but the biggest is them being cheap They have APS technology but it has yet to make an appearance The US military is heavily invested in drones and network centric warfare so that everyone has access to eyes in the sky as well as the ability to deploy their own eyes in the sky Lastly, virtually US vehicles have CROWS whereas very very few Russia vehicles have it Russia's problems are easily traced As for armor If the enemy has significant air power and precision munitions, then armor usefulness is in question If the enemy has significant precision munitions and the tanks little protection and support,again usefulness is in question
    2
  89.  @frabe81118  The B-21 has considerably lower RCS than any fighter
    2
  90. Actually they dont The US greatest defense is that few subs can cross the ponds Crossing the Pacific or Atlantic even for SSN is an endurance test The US has forward operating bases and sub tenders that relieve that stress a bit No one else has that
    2
  91. The simple answer is no There are already too much weapons over there Ironically ,its the reason for NATO standard, too many calibers were in use during the WWII by the allies They just need 5.56 and 7.62 for general use , the few calibers for sniper rifles and big 50 Techincally you could simplify things and use 50 for both sniper and HMG Hell I will give you 300.ACC for CQB
    2
  92.  @jawarakf  Again thats still waste of time ATGM teams can simply double tap or use anti material rifles to destroy the tanks sensors or use IEDs The fact is that market for armor destruction has produced weapons that APS nor ERA can't stop Unless you have tanks with ARC reactor like Iron man which can power 500kW laser for a quick firing laser defense system armor days are number The US, Russia and Israel have developed light weight but lethal systems For Israel is the Spike NLOS on Sandcats The US , the JTLV with 30mm cannon and various mission options and Russia the GaZ Tigr with Kornet missile All 3 can be built faster and easier than armor Light enough for helo to carry them externally MRAPs can handle urban warfare
    2
  93. No likely The USAF learned a long time ago that operating stealth with electronic warfare (EW) and Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) With EW and SEAD engaging enemy defenses , they dont have time to look for stealth The loss of the F-117 showed that if you gave the enemy time, they can and will locate stealth so the trick is not to give them that time The TLAMs and JASSMs need 40 minutes to cover 350 miles That means EA-18Gs has suppress defenses for that long which is impossible. Also, a Su-35 or J-11 would get in weapons range in 8 mins The hypersonic weapons like the ARRW covers that distance in 1 min 24 sec The EA-18G can easily suppress defenses for that long and neither Su-35 or J-11 would have time to get in range With defense out of the way, stealth has free reign AWACS can upgrade B-21 with enemy positions so they can maintain a safe distance and risk possible detection
    2
  94. Yeah, Bullpup designs are good for sniper rifles ,not for battle or assault rifles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q-QVBQVYTA See how fast he is able to reload you can't do that with a bullpup
    2
  95. Ultimately, the main gun is not the issue , but rather the secondary weapon The mainstay of most secondary weapons has been 50 cal. but even with CROWS, shooting a 50 cal against drones is still challenging a main gun of 30mm would give it the flexibility to engage both drones and ground targets but 30mm against medium to heavy armor is not very effective for modern warfare The 50mm would highly effective even against T-14 it could easily shred T-14s sensors and tracks and could possibly even get mobility kill bit 50mm for C-UAS is very iffy and and kW DEW for C-UAS would require extra power Abrams X uses 30mm which is very flexible for it size What they need to do for XM30 is go with 50mm but dust of the programmable rounds from XM25 CDTE and go with secondary 25mm cannon which would solve both issue The 25mm is lighter but just as lethal.The problem with 30mm is weight. Logistically the 30mm makes more sense because its already available but additional weight to the XM30 is the draw back
    2
  96.  @angman1966  You kinda have to be able to defeat MBT in modern warfare Case in point, A Bradley smoked a column of Russian armor as they were ill equipped A tank is not going to run up on a Bradly as they know it can punch their lights out
    2
  97. I wouldnt say that The smart choice would have been to go with the HK-417 or FN SCAR or adopt the XM7 with 7.62 but argument was still the same about weight a full load of 7.62 is still heavier its seems like Polymer-cased ammunition (PCA) hasnt reached the point to where militaries are ready to adopt for general use If you could rework the 7.62 round for higher penetration and longer range but reduce the load to weight its not that much heavier than previous rounds you would strike gold But ultimately as tech moves on We are getting close to the 10x24 explosive tip caseless ammo from aliens
    2
  98.  @MrZlocktar  I always laugh when fanboys S-400 and S-500 because you ding dongs don't know what the systems are designed for The S-500 is primary function is for as anti-ballistic moron, not anti-air. range of 600 km (370 mi) for anti-ballistic missile (ABM) and 500 km (310 mi) for air defense Secondly Even with at 310 miles, the US made JASSM-ER range is 620 miles , the JASSM-XR is 1200 miles. The Joint Strike Missile (JSM) range is 350 miles Thats 3 weapons that easily outrange the S-400 and S-500. The US has a very long list of weapons that outrange the S-400 and S-500 most advanced anti-space weapon system on a globe That would be US made SM-3 The S-500 range 370 vs SM-3 Block 1 range 560 and block 2 1500 miles Unlike Russia , the SM-3 is compatible with all 90 USN AEGIS ships Thats facts not propaganda. Example Russian officials brushed off the Javelin missile as joke, yet Russia tanker were seen welding cages trying to protect their tanks from Javelin
    2
  99. Tanks usefulness depends on various factors, the first being the combatants Again a country like the US, tanks are useless. The US sure kill way of killing tanks dates back to 1991 Tank Plinking where US forces were shredding Iraqi tanks by dropping 500lbs GBU-12s.That worked then and even now against the newer tanks like T-14, Armata, it still works. The US military has endless ways of dealing with armor The problem now is that ATGMs have gotten, lighter , longer range, better seekers and improved warhead Example. the GAZ Tigr with Kornet, Israeli Spike NLOS, Tomcar/Sandcar and the US made JTLV with ATGMs are all lightweight assets that can be easily deployed and able to deal with armor The Israeli Spike NLOS, Tomcar/Sandcar topping the scales with its lethality as the Spike NLOS can be launched from 16 miles away,. The Tomcar system is light enough to be carried by MV-22, CH-47 or CH-53 internally but most importantly, the NLOS can perform 90 degree drop on targets which allows to bypass tanks countermeasures The future of armor depends entirely on support from EW an SHORAD
    2
  100. The development of the Sig MG 338 makes the PKM a moot point. More to the point the development of the newer 338 caliber machine guns makes matching the PKM moot as the 338 has longer range and 3 times the energy
    2
  101.  @pogo1140  Armed with the right weapons yes lets use Russia's weapons if they could locate the site, A Gaz Tigr with Kornet D/EM missiles could destroy the site from 5 miles away. First missile destroys the command truck, the second the drone and the remaining missiles the rest of the site In the case of the US The 3 men in a dune buggy would be a SEAL team with a JTAC calling for an air or missile strike
    2
  102.  @andyf10  Technically any aircraft capable of aerial refueling can loiter for 24 hours Generally , only heavy bombers do that because they have the space for the crew to rotate as well as other comforts Their fuel capacity means only a few trips to the tanker
    2
  103. Ukraine is what is known as a target rich environment so there is plenty of targets to chose from Russian forward operating bases where personnel and equipment are targets. Dropping a HIMARS missile where personnel sleep it brutal but effective vehicles have to be parked somewhere. Staging areas. convoy Russian bases where KA-52, MI-28 and MI-35s are targets. S-300/400 sites, EW and other air defense assets also targets Even with the 40 mile missiles, Ukraine still has plenty of targets to chose from
    2
  104. As far that goes, The USMC has MADIS. L-MADIS and MRIC for anti air., The only thing they need to based on what we seen in Ukraine is change out the FIM-92 Stinger for the AIM-9X for MADIS and Adopt the Multi-Mission Launcher with AIM-9X, AIM-120C-5, TAMIR ,Hellfire and Spike NLOS on the HIMARS frame Germany makes a 30mm variant of their 35mm AHEAD rounds which is another item they need to adopt Covers all your bases The AIM-9X and AIM-120C5 against helicopters, fixed wing jets and cruise missiles The 30mm cannon for drones The Tamir for C-RAM Hellfire and Spike NLOS for defensive and offensive
    2
  105. Hell you can even call doordash
    2
  106. The simple fact is that beggers cant' be cant chosers
    2
  107.  @tk03_85  The ZTQ weights over 20 tons, there no way it can be safely para-dropped. Para dropped is 16 tons on down More than likely what they are referring to is low-altitude parachute-extraction system (LAPES) where the transport only a few feet off the ground and the tank dropping 10-20 feet at most The M10 heavy weight is likely due to thick armor but still its 30 tonnes less than an Abrams The Abrams is the deciding factor as the Army keeps changing direction what will replace it so its likely the Booker is interim fix till they decide as the EU wants to 130mm or 140mm for next main gun
    2
  108.  @logicomega7  Same for goes for China DFs are over 15 tons , thats not something you can fire in salos
    2
  109.  @newsieboys1171  Simple because range does not matter You keep saying half the range but keep forgetting aerial refueling
    2
  110.  @sirshade222  Very true, it has to say afloat but whats stopping the US fro destroying the launchers What stopping a Virginia class sub from closing to 400 miles off China's coast and firing LRHW. At that range, the missile will be on target in 2 mins or HACM from the air from 1000 away miles on target in 13 minutes
    2
  111.  @newsieboys1171  No you havent The DF-21 range is 900 miles whereas the F-18 is 444 miles. The F-18 can launch JASSM-ER from 600 miles away From 1000 miles away., the F-18 only needs 1 aerial refueling to get within JASSM-ER and even then its only 155 miles that it needs to get in range and leave As for returning home, its not issue, China lacks the tankers need to project its planes that far out In order to prevent CVN aircraft from attacking, Chinese aircraft would have to be positioned at 700 miles away which they can't do So no there is no badly jeopardizing (hilarious statement) As far the CSG, goes, they have several ways to hold DF-21s at risk Whats stopping a Virginia class sub from close to 400 miles nominally and launching TLAMs against DF-21s Whats stopping a Zumwalt class from firing LRHW from 1000 miles away
    2
  112. @Aaron Muller What is going to happen is that its going be M-16A5 with a new caliber. The M-16 design has proven to be very effective. The only real problem is that its not ambidextrous. As for dealing with threats at 1000 -1200 plus yards away. Designated marksmen with a semi auto 338 would be the best. Obviously Big 50 is too heavy for DMR to use. a 338 semi auto would be light enough for a DMR to keep pace. The argument back in the day was the weight of the 7.62 and the weapons that use it. Today you have the HK 417, FN SCAR and ARX100. More to the point, there are enough weapon companies in the world that make a rifle to make that can easily outclass a 5.56 Technology has advanced there 7.62 need to return as the primary caliber. 5.56 can be remain for CQB. 7.62 , 338 and 50 should be what the infantry should have on tap. The Army had the XM25 CDTE. That weapon right there with improvements would easily dealt with the PKM at 1200 but instead of fixing, they walked away typically Army
    2
  113. The US has been developing new material since the F-117 first flown Combat operations with the B-2, F-117s and F-22s gave them an idea of what they needed to make
    2
  114. Hit to kill technology wasnt impossible , it just needed money
    2
  115.  @richardspears5384  C-RAM and other point defense systems are Ukraine is showing have their limits Russian's Tunguska's and Panstir S1 ironically are getting smoked by artillery strikes They were designed to aircraft and cruise missiles but are completely vulnerable to 155m rounds Small FPOV drones are damaging their sensors
    2
  116.  @jaypee389  Its about peer level engagements with Chinese and Russian forces where body armor is excepted Secondly the point of the 6.8 is that 5.56 were failing faster than normal as they cant handle the strain from sustained M855 use
    2
  117.  @jaypee389  Hence the need for something that can massive outrange the PKM which the MG-338 does but at the end of the day its not enough The Pike 40mm grenade munition and Carl Gustaf Guided munition can hit targets excess of 2000 yards but they are not rapid fire The XM25 CDTE should be revisited and upgraded to able engage targets precisely at 2500 yards rapid fire The original model range of 500-765 yards, I completely understand why it was not liked but if they can get it out to 2500 yards and keeping weight down, it could be valuable asset
    2
  118.  @goodlife6277  That would be 100 percent false The Kornet in ready fire mode weighs 140lbs thats missile weight plus tripod. The Javelin in ready fire mode weights just 50lbs thats missile weight and CLU The Korent hasnt been used as its a literally a boon in Ukraine high intensity conflict. The only missiles that Russian forces are using on the ground is the RPG-7, 29 and 32 and other disposable 1 shot models The missile you mentioned require too much time and effort to move
    2
  119. The JTLV is definitely a step in the right direction but in war with China, equipment like this buggy is a much better option https://www.army-technology.com/news/rafael-air-deployable-missile-launcher/ The Spike NLOS can strike targets 16 miles away and has various warhead options for different target types CH-53 and MV-22 can transport buggies like this internally which allows ground forces to rapidly deploy, strike and get outta dodge before the enemy can counter attack. In the pacific, forces need high mobility, The JTLV 10K weight is not exactly idea for high mobility operations as it has to be carried externally by helo or by by LCAC which is time consuming. In a European conflict, the JTLV and its options is perfect. Buggys like this can pave the way for JLTV and HIMARS. The only thing that USMC needs to be change is this ttps://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/02/12/heres-the-us-marine-corps-plan-for-sinking-chinese-ships-with-drone-missile-launchers/ Use the HIMARS ,not the JTLV .
    2
  120.  @utoobuser206  The Hummer like everything has had its time its time for something new
    2
  121.  @christophergolias3610  A possiblity would be the special forces MH-60 DAP with a changes Redesigned to carry the Longbow mast and Stubwings As long as it retains the aerial refueling probe its a winner
    2
  122.  @AtlantiansGaming  The LCS problems and Zumwalt are too different animals The LCS problem was that the USN should decided long long ago that Freedom class would fill the role for LCS while the Independence class would be redesigned for the FFG role Congress thought they need better than USN and hence why the Zumwalt ended being wasted The USN's only screw ups was One- not use the NATO standard 155mm round, they used their own 155mm design which doomed the AGS Two, the design of the Zumwalt has no provision for CIWS
    2
  123.  kittycat3015  China has no plane chinese bot
    2
  124.  @JustNo8808  The Woke havent completely taken over
    2
  125.  @voidtempering8700  oryx open source has visual confirmed the capture of intact Russian tanks of all models
    2
  126.  @voidtempering8700  Thats just plain denial The images on oryx show fully intact example captured
    2
  127.  @voidtempering8700  Incorrect The images various tanks captured in various states from slighty damaged to fully intact In the T-90M section, the first capture image is show a fully intact T-90M
    2
  128. SAW II MG sounds better Either way, its great improvement but they still work on making M2 lighter
    2
  129. A programmable airburst round either HEDP or based on Germany AHEAD is the only option Barrett;s XM109 has the muzzle velocity but its too heavy. The XM25 CDTE is lighter but still heavy when fully loaded so the happy median ironically would go down to 23mm or use odd caliber and see if that can achieve all 3 Light enough for troops to use without issue but still effective enough to KO drones in 1 shot at long range
    2
  130. No and Yes No LM are not needed but yes APS is a must
    2
  131. Because the turtle tank is fixed to only one direction to fire whereas the Bradely is not
    2
  132. Yup The Taliban and Insurgents never had advanced weapons, equipment or intel Ukraine forces have all 3 The Javelin missile has been called St Javelin by Ukraine forces because they are absolutely in love with it They would marry it if it was legal LMAO Taliban and Insurgents had to rely on homemade explosives and a lot of luck The Ukraine forces can set back and precisely target from up to 2.9 miles away. They have been smartly going after Russia supply lines Russia armor is being abandoned as they are running out of fuel The fact that the West is providing the Ukraine with real time intel on Russia movements has effectively killed their momentum Russia will win eventually but the cost without doubt will be astronomical Conquering Ukraine is one thing ,but holding is going far more messy than Russia has ever dealt within
    2
  133. Silent vehicles are good for special operations where stealth is needed or recon missions Hunting armor doesnt need stealth, just long range weapons
    2
  134. The XM25 Counter Defilade Target Engagement (CDTE) uses 25mm programmable round I would say use the XM25 as base and bring it back as C-UAS with higher velocity and improved round based on the Germany 35mm AHEAD round
    2
  135.  @kara88bg  It wouldnt, thats would need multi layer defenses counter different munition types
    2
  136. ​ @Tigerman1138  In a nutshell yes Modern ATGMs can be guided by Electro-Optical or Semi-Active Laser (SAL) to exact same point on a tank Modern anti-materiel rifle (AMR) can use High-explosive incendiary/armor-piercing ammunition (HEIAP) which are explosive rounds with a tungsten sub-penetrator as well saboted light armor penetrator (SLAP) rounds also with tungsten sub-penetrator AMR can easily use SLAP or HEIAP to neutralize EM armor. AMR can also target Active protection systems as well The USMC combined anti-armor team (CAAT) uses combo of AMR, AGS and ATGMs to engage tanks Counter armor tech has advanced to the point where heavy armor is becoming moot
    2
  137.  @Pancakes-san  Close but no The issue with the US military was the micromanagement from the civilian leadership coupled with the egg head officers By this time, most of the combat experienced commanders from WWII and Korea had already retired so they were left with egg heads who fly desks
    2
  138.  @Matt-yg8ub  Lockheed was already part of the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter (CALF) , Advanced Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (ASTOVL and Joint Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) projects So yes they were ahead of the game
    2
  139.  @Matt-yg8ub  The Zumwalt is just much wasted potential, its irritating
    2
  140. The Ukraine forces problems is that they lack the ability for long range precision strike. Their missile and artillery are relics from the Cold war so its not surprising that they are so ineffective. In short, they can't inflict large scale damage on Russia forces, all they can do is chip away at them Now the US is now finally providing the weapon I was hoping which is Loitering Munitions If Ukraine forces are able to get Loitering Munitions with anti-armor capability or at least decent size 18lbs-20lbs warhead, they can turn this situation around very quickly Targets like fuel dumps, munition supplys, commands post and other critical assets to Russia forces as operating force can be destroyed with Loitering Munitions Parked aircraft on airfields are also targets Israeli IAI Harpy, Mini Harpy and IAI IAI Harop would be the ideal combination with 100 of each The US Switchblade 600 is good start but they need the IAI models Loitering Munitions used on a strategic scale against all those targets with the proper planning , coordination and attacking simultaneously would be devastating blow to Russia forces All the West has to do is supply munitions and intel and the Ukrainian forces could hand Russia a broken jaw in addition to black eye and bloody nose they already have
    2
  141.  @chrissmith7669  The Apache isnt wired for the AIM-9 That never went beyond testing
    2
  142.  @greysheeum  How about no ding dong why equip if the mission doesnt call for it its called operational need They only install it as needed and store when its not needed
    2
  143. Cracking down on the cartel is simple its called MQ-9 Hellfire missiles would shred any vehicles they used as well precisely destroy any building they hid For extra kick, 500lbs PGMs can be used No need for ground forces to get into fire fight MQ-9s start crossing them off whole sale and you will cartels disappear over night
    1
  144.  @terranempire2  They already have the Trophy. Like I said, its iffy on the rest
    1
  145.  @terranempire2  If its weight is right the Army may scale back the MPF
    1
  146.  @terranempire2  No my mistake GDLS makes both So I seriously doubt they would the AbramsX a threat to MPF program H
    1
  147. That is correct but you are missing a few key points The Fujian is still conventional limited by its fuel supply
    1
  148. Russia has that in spades. When you look at the people in Russia's high level position, they lack experience Hell the Russian minster of defense never served a day in the military yet it trying to run a war?
    1
  149. Absolutely it can make a difference
    1
  150. Their saving grace is that Ukraine lacks the weapons to decimate that convoy
    1
  151.  @southbrazosbass244  Again its their lack of weapons Specifically capable weapons
    1
  152. Yes and no
    1
  153.  @Noodle5593  What I stated is facts You are just painfully in denial The underground fuel tanks were empty when the Task Force turned up in mid-April 1982,” recalls Major General Julian Thompson, then commanding the main Royal Marines assault force. The leading assault ship, HMS Fearless, did not have enough fuel to dock when it arrived off Ascension. The Americans diverted a supertanker to fill up the Navy’s tanks. There are several articles both US and UK that detail the US supplying the UK with millions of gallons of fuel British Military has had the use of its milcomsat-FALSE LOL Again several US and UK that detail the US allowing the UK of its SATCOM denial much
    1
  154.  @bhaskarmukherjee8170  We can safely say not happening China's lack of tankers means they can't project while the USN and USAF If China had ample tankers , they could easily create an A2/D2 with aircraft up to 1000 away With tankers, they are basically stuck
    1
  155.  @aaronleverton4221  Wow, more people in denial And where exactly did the Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships get the fuel.? Once again The UK had no assets able to deliver the fuel needed to support their operations, the US diverting a supertanker allows them to refuel both ships and aircraft allowing the UK to conduct sustained operations without having to worry about fuel." Extremely poorly-worded and You failed to specify is beyond pitiful First what is the fuel capacity of said ships Thats right, Tidespring and Appleleaf combined was 55,000 tonnes of fuel Wanna take a guess on how much fuel the Hermes and Invincible alone required not counting the Fearless and Interpid But please continue this is hilarious
    1
  156.  @aaronleverton4221  For starters, you have no point Trying to rewrite history to make seem that the UK didn't need anyone help with Falklands is pitiful The UK didn't need US to supply them with fuel or SATCOM nor them prohibit arms sales to Argentina Nor France's embargo on French arms The UK magically did on their own sad
    1
  157.  @aaronleverton4221  Ah yes, the famous strawman claims LOL That would be you not me Everything I stated is established facts ,however like I stated, you trying to rewrite history claiming that UK did all alone LMAO what you call defensiveness, just your hilarious self-disillusions
    1
  158.  @Noodle5593  Right anything saying that the UK had massive help in the Falklands is obscure Sad how you are trying to rewrite history now
    1
  159.  @aaronleverton4221  For not buying the your revisionist crap LMAO UK didnt do it alone in the Fallkands get over it
    1
  160. ​ @frabe81118  Even you spotted the tanker, you still have to guess what target they are coming after The only option is putting up a wall of fighters which can problematic for a dozen reasons namely you are showing your end and letting the enemy know what bases are scrambling fighters They can targeted by sub or ship launched missiles With the newer generation of hypersonic weapons missiles can be on target in under 5 mins depend on the range which can be fatal because they can knock out your assets before they can be used
    1
  161.  @aaronleverton4221  Yawn!!!
    1
  162.  @rewinderon707  He's constantly attacked Ukraine inhumanely this would be a helluva of reality check
    1
  163.  @GreenLeafUponTheSky  Number 2 Russia is less likely to use the full force of its weapons on its own soil. You honestly think Putin or his general would even consider use nukes on Russian soil
    1
  164.  @M16_Akula-III  China has few SSNs Without tenders or forward operating bases, that trip is miserable Then consider that destroyers have towed sonar and ASW helicopter. Once those subs fire their missile, the US will back track to the grid and have P-8s overheard Say you fired from 1000 miles A P-8 would be overheard in 2 hours How far can SSN travel in 2 hours at 30 knots , 65 miles A P-8 would find them in no time and drop MK-54 And thats assuming thats there is Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) MQ-4C nearby if there is The P-8 is just coming in to drop Mk-54s
    1
  165.  @M16_Akula-III  The US is only buying 2 because thats all they really need
    1
  166.  @M16_Akula-III  Simple The VL-ASROC requires the destroyer to be in range and its range is only 12 miles A Sub is not going to fire if there is nearby surface ship ASW Helo has fraction of the capability of the P-8
    1
  167.  @M16_Akula-III  Thats why they do buoys instead Unless is ship is nearby , The P-8 is the only option
    1
  168.  @johnronellequinones4819  No, Iraq was the one converted a lear jet to carry 2 Exocet missiles. The issue with flight 655 was that it came from the same airport as Iranian military aircraft and the crew misidentified the aircraft flight profile as well several other factors The biggest is that the ship was unable to communicate with the aircraft
    1
  169.  @johnronellequinones4819  misidentification happens and there is very little that can be done about it. One of the reason why the US military pushed the advancement targeting pods and other Electro-Optical Targeting technology is to reduce misidentification Wiki leaks leaked July 12, 2007, Baghdad airstrike claiming it to be cover up however the poor quality of the video showed the Apache Target Acquisition and Designation Sights (TADS) did not have resolution to clearly see the situation and pilots made their best guess. The result of the incident lead to the Army speeding up the fielding of the Arrowhead and even now, the Army signed another contract for increased higher-resolution color imaging with longer ranges and a wider field of view but even with the best tech accidents can and will happen
    1
  170. @@JimCarner Electronc warfare is going to make passive systems like TERCOM ,DSMAC and Automatic Target Recognition Unit (ATRU) top priority as means able to drop bombs and the enemy has no way to soft kill them with jamming
    1
  171. The Rapid Dragon is an interesting twist but as the C-17s is no longer in production, I would think they would focus more expanding capabilities on the C-130 or throw Airbus a bone and buy A-400Ms
    1
  172. The fact is that with the rapid advance of light but lethal weapon on ground and air asks the question is armor of any use any more?
    1
  173. Its not uncommon for old programs to be recycled
    1
  174. The fact is that with the rapid advance of light but lethal weapon on ground and air asks the question is armor of any use any more ?
    1
  175. Having them is one thing but can they use them Not really
    1
  176. What happened was stupidity The USN told Congress repeatedly that Naval gunfire was no relevant in large scale engagements but Congress in their infinite stupidity knew better and the USN ended wasting the Zumwalt design
    1
  177.  @paghilumdihauy  Functional is pushing it The Su-57 more wrong than right
    1
  178.  @menzbercedes8962  No Ukraine doesnt have time for training to use the F-35 And they had crash course with the Abrams whats Russia's excuse
    1
  179. If Ukraine gets enough to create an integrated air defence system (IADS) it will make a major difference
    1
  180. True but it would have made more sense to make an MGS variant from ACV or make one based off the LAV-25 or its replacment The Japanese Type-16 MCV would have been a good design to use
    1
  181. China is smart but also bone dead dumb at the same time. As you stated, their actions are driving the Philippines back to the US For while , the Philippines wanted nothing to do with the US but thanks to China's overzealous actions they have gone back
    1
  182.  @didyoumissedmegobareatersk2204  Apparently you can't read F-22s in top cover ding ding
    1
  183.  @catadoxas  You are clueless
    1
  184.  @MrZlocktar  Blah blah bah The US and NATO are already doing plenty by supplying Ukraine forces off hand. As long as those supplies are flowing, all Russia is going to do is count their dead in Ukraine as the over hyped S-500, 400 and 300 LMAO Russia can't use none of above First Ukraine is over 233,00 sqaures miles ding, dong, you would need close to 500 plus units for complete coverage Russia has ample S-300s however they have considerably shorter range Russia is not pulling S-400 or S-500 as Ukraine borders several NATO countries which would allow NATO intel gathering to gleam valuable data So how about nope
    1
  185.  @Rocketsong  Exactly
    1
  186. Only years late
    1
  187. Same thing that happened to every other piece of Russian armor that was sent to Ukraine It under performed badly
    1
  188.  @Mortablunt  Combat in Afghan and Iraq exposed the problems with 5.56 and 7.62 The 5.56 was outranged and lacked stopping power. The 7.62 was simply outranged. The 50 cal is simply too heavy 338 offers both range and power. Granted, its heavier but not as heavy as big 50
    1
  189.  @Mortablunt  The 7.62 is outrange The 338 isnt as heavy as the 50 they are taking what ever saving they can
    1
  190. Different times
    1
  191. Zumwalt and Littoral Combat Ship are just wasted potential If the USN had been smart, they wouldnt be in this mess Conestellation class can avoid being a mess if the USN equip its with the same swappable VLS mod as the DDG-X One of the problems with VLS is the time needed to reload The swappable will greatly cut down time in port for reload
    1
  192.  @protorhinocerator142  The idea of the Arsenal ship died out because reload arming that type of ship even with swappable mod would be a massive chore Huntington Ingalls Industries showed a BMD concept of the a LPD 17 with MK-41 288 VLS capacity or 144 MK-57 The USN response was they didnt need that many VLS cells They showed Future Surface Combatant based LPD-17 with 96 cell So yes cargo ship ,ideally an LPD-17 would be best for not that reason The electromagnetic railgun (EMRG) had two issue, Ships able to generate enough power and barrel life Mount on LPD-17, it could be fitted with a system to automatic exchange barrels Secondly hypervelocity projectile (HVP) can be fired from the standard 5 inch Last the Laser weapons The 5 inch gun would stay mounted in bow with Laser weapons on both sides The Future Surface Combatant design had a reared mounted 57mm which would replace by the EMRG Retain the MK-57s on the sides but add the swappable VLS and advanced payload module The LPD-17 is big enough to accommodate everything as well as can fitted with 3 MT-30s in an Integrated Power System (IPS) set up The benefit of the LPD17 is already built and USN plans to close 30 ships so reduces cost The MT-30 and IPS proven technology and would the only differences between the LPD-17s designs With ample power from its IPS, Laser weapons can tuned for 150kW drone, 600kW for missile and 1MW shots for large targets
    1
  193.  @protorhinocerator142  The LPD-17 is easier and faster than a barge. Secondly a flat badge is not survivable in modern warfare. Thats literally a massive target and very easy target for submarine But most importantly you get more utility out of an LPD-17 vs a missile barge
    1
  194.  @Birdylockso  Which is kinda strange Since Ukraine ,the industrial military complex has had to ramp up to meet countries needs who sent Ukraine weapons and need to replace orders from other countries who want to beef up their defenses and countries wanting new weapons developed because the lessons from Ukraine Yet politicians in DC are fighting over aid thats putting money in their pockets simply because the orange jackass said something ??
    1
  195. Trump isnt the POTUS He's detail doesnt have all the bells and whistles but yes Law enforcement was supposed to secure that building especially given its locaton
    1
  196. Well the problem with Armor is that it can be defeated. High grade 50 rounds like the SLAP and MK-211 can easily shred body armor. Even if the armor does stop the round the shear amount of kinetic energy from the impact will kill the wearer. In order for it to be useful, it will have to be protect the wearer from penetration as well as the KE from the impact. So that layers of armor potential. Secondly rounds impact on limbs is another problem as 50 can easy rip off limbs So any suit would need all around protection. Its possible but when dealing with heavy weapons, protection is simply not going to happen Power is another problem. While Iron man has fictional a power supply, we live in reality and dont have compact power supplies Honestly we dont have technology yet Now if you are building a 10 ft plus tall system, then yes we have the technology to do so but a suit as ultra compact as the TAOS Iron man is not available with our current level of technology
    1
  197. North Korea isnt exactly a ASW powerhouse so its very likely that the US already sent the USS Jimmy Carter to record the subs acoustics as well as test its capabilities The crew probably was crying with laughter from the amount of noise it made
    1
  198. Not short sighted It happens when you have asses with zero military experience in the wrong positions
    1
  199. Its Russian vaporware
    1
  200. Ultimately in order to drive Russia out of Ukraine, Ukraine need 3 pieces The first is knocking out the remaining surface combatants and 4 Kilo class subs of the Black Sea fleet Why that matters, without those ships, Russia's ability to strike from the sea neutralized, Russia's ability to blockade Ukraine also done Russian forces resupplying from ships , again gone. Taking out the Black Sea assets would be massive blow to Russian operations in Ukraine For this they need long range precision strike capability. While the HIMARS missiles have 200lbs warhead,, the Harpoon 487lbs does more destruction per missile Why the Harpoon The newer blocks of the Harpoon have both land and sea attack capability and range between 75 to 150 miles. Besides have 3 times the range of the HIMARS M31s but slightly shorter than the ATACMS, the key advantage to Harpoon is that launchers on trucks are quad packed. With ATACMS its 1 on HIMARS and 2 on the M270 The Harpoon coastal units carry 4 missiles. , So with the Harpoon , you more missiles per launcher The Harpoon's ability to attack both land and sea targets give Ukraine the ability to neutralize the black sea fleet as well strike other high value targets on land As the Harpoon's warhead is like dropping GBU-12 The next piece is integrated air defence system (IADS) With IADS, It puts the already strained Russian aviation assets in difficult position as well provides protection against cruise missile attacks The last piece is their aviation assets Missiles are good but aircraft are better The only plane for this job is the F-16 and its amazing simple The F-16 has the CART CFT which allows to use drogue instead of boom which means that Ukrainian air force cause Su-27s as tankers The Ukrainian air force only need 5 weapons, AIM-9Rs and AIM-120C-5 which are both late 90s tech so even if they ended up in Russian hands they are still decades out dated, AGM-65s and GBU-10/12/16 and AGM-84 again , the US has plenty of older models from the late 90s that wouldnt betray anything to Russia if they got their hands on it. Same goes for the 20mm gun. The F-16 is also LANTRIN capable which is still in use and again old tech If Ukraine gets all of these its game over for Russian forces
    1
  201.  @ZOV24-2-22  How about no FPV drones are working in Ukraine because both sides are ill equipped to deal with tme There are a few solutions to the FPV issue however one that is gaining traction is upgrading active protection system (APS) with additional launchers with programmable airburst round either low velocity HEDP 40mm rounds or high velocity 30mm AHEAD rounds so adding the new features to the existing assets allow them to test options for counter drones Second, the US wouldnt have Ukraine problems in a conflict Russian forces are caught unaware 90 percent of the time US forces have Joint Battle Command-Platform (PM JBC-P) which is carried by all forces and can be equipped even to HMWVVs For battle management and airborne ground surveillance . the USAF used the E-8 JSTARS giving forces on ground real time info on enemy movement Even though the USAF retired it, the US Army has been allowed to buy a replacement for it While Russia doesnt take SEAD/DEAD seriously The US has EA-18G, F-16CJ, EC-130H ,Rivet Joint and Combat Sent as well as E/A-37 in RD and the bulk of US aircraft can use the AGM-88., ADM-141 and ADM-160s The US has a whole arsenal devoted to destruction of enemy defenses and also thanks to Iraq and Afghn, Electronic warfare sensors are far more precise Lastly, the US wrote the book on drone warfare with the MQ-1 and MQ-9 As the US takes SEAD/DEAD seriously, Ukraine wouldnt have SAMs to target aircraft and the US would have its airborne ground surveillance , AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft opening with impunity
    1
  202.  @tk03_85  The M10 is only 2 tons heavier
    1
  203. On a scale of 1 to 10 about 6
    1
  204.  @JD96893  Sorry but no The F-117 is not viable for modern warfare. The F-35 makes upgrading the F-117 moot The F-35 weapons bay was designed from the start to accommodate various weapons whereas the F-117 was only designed for bombs And thats the biggest problem was that F-117 payload limits its use
    1
  205. Thats an impressive increase but bullpup rifles are no good for infantry. Maybe for snipers and thats about it It takes too much effort with mag changes
    1
  206. It been exported to a few countries so its not surprising, just hilarious that Russian forces are also relying on western tech
    1
  207. Ukraine is simply exposing how badly Russian forces conventional capabilities are lacking if the US was in Ukraine, it would have been over a long time ago What Ukraine has show is that Russian lacks Persistent Air Support (PAS) , SEAD, and intel For SEAD, the US has EA-18Gs, F-16CJ, and EC-130s for dealing with air defense So far ,Russia has been able to neutralize Ukraine's Soviet Era SAMs but not the newer Western systems The US would be actively hunting and destroying SAMSs With SAMS out of the picture, PAS with MQ-9s would actively hunting MLRS and artillery unlike loitering munitions, the MQ-9s carries Hellfires ,and JDAMs which will 100 percent destroy would they hit If Russia made drones like the MQ-9, HIMARS launchers and other SPAs would have been destroyed long ago Lastly Russian intel Ukraine's president has been traveling back and forth with ease The US would have been had F-22s or MQ- waiting Others areas that Russia is lacking is aircraft capabilities All US aircraft have targeting pods for precision strike Russian aircraft dont have pods and that is why so many of their strike aircraft have been lost they are getting within MANPAD range and getting smoked 22 Su-34s lost The F-15E across 7 conflicts is fraction of that its possible for carriers to come under attack but impossible for that to be destroy as easily as others claim Lockheed has developed 500kW DEW for the Army and the DDGX is planned to have 600kW if the USN commits to SM-6s launched by F-18s, 500-600Kw laser weapons to DDG and CVNs, PAC-3s along SM-6s from VLS and Hyper Velocity Projectile (HVP) from Mk-45 guns and an working Countermeasure Anti-Torpedo (CAT) system with Anti-Torpedo Torpedo Good luck with that
    1
  208.  @RobFomenko  You can still use paratroopers without complete control of the air but you would have to carve a hole for them to get in Ideally , you wanna air drop them with Humvees with ATGM like the Spike NLOS for anti armor and Stingers for air defense Air dropping Humvee Hawkete with 105mm would also needed The combo all 3 would allow paratroopers to hold out as well be mobile increasing their survival Without vehicle support, they are easy targets
    1
  209.  @RobFomenko  Hence why SEAD is needed to carve out that hole
    1
  210.  @Alex-o4j4t  How about no There are images of the CM-32 side by side with other models and the height difference is only a few inches at most The CM-32 with 30mm side by side with 105mm shows there is no height difference
    1
  211.  @Alex-o4j4t  There is no height between the CM-32 equipped with 30mm and the 105mm variant Nor is there certain tunnel issue thats just made up The CM-32 baseline is height 7 ft while tanks and self-propelled howitzers height is 11 ft Thats M109, CM-11 and M-60s all over 10ft The CM-32 turret at most puts it at 8 and half feet, 9 ft at most For ample clearance, tunnels would have be at least 13 ft The key requirement for force dispersal is commonality so any asset can take shelter in any location by saying on certain location can house certain assets, you have basically told the enemy where critical are stored
    1
  212.  @Alex-o4j4t  Again wrong with made up nonsense The bulk of modern IFV/APC height averages between 7-9 ft Even the Japanse Type-16 , US Stryker MGS and German boxer is are 9ft So literally no Tawian would slow project for a few inches
    1
  213.  @Alex-o4j4t  Again there are images that show them side by side with other and there is no magic height difference
    1
  214. At the end of the day The US military pioneered tank plinking Pretty sure they can do it again
    1
  215. Tanks normal range 200-300 miles These tanks are likely diesel so they can handle being idle for that long Now US tanks with is tasty gas turbine engine not so much
    1
  216.  @somedudeonline-i3t  Again ivan lay off the potato juice The US has 11 CVNs plus LHA/D class as light carriers for total of 20 ships , thats plenty Lets break it down for you as you are slow In fight with Iran, the USN will have EA-18Gs jamming with USAF F-22s hunting for the Iranian air force. 1 Ohio-class SSGN from 500 miles , well outside Iran's defense capability will lay waste to Iran's defense As long as the EA-18Gs are jamming, Iran defenses will be degraded so they have to no choice but to go after EA-18Gs and F-22s will be waiting The US will target Iran's defenses ,command and control air fields and MRBM sites What can Iran do, literally nothing B-1s can carry up 24 JASSMs with 600 mile range which again make every part of Iran easily targets Fun fact, is that Israel will welcome US forces operating as Iran to Israel is only 1100 miles or come from Diego Garica Russia and China pound for pound can't match the USN The backbone of the USN is Burke class with its 90 cell VLS, China has VLS ships but only 20 ish Russia has only frigates Key part of VLS is that ships can carry anything what is Russian strongest surface combat, only 2 Kirovs which are easily matched by Ticos and Burke China's 8 Type-55 again matched by the Burkes and Ticos
    1
  217.  @hyokkim7726  Very much so
    1
  218.  @Mrwizard-ck7oe  lets see US based in Iraq and Afghan were attacked by insurgents using VIED and mortars What can insurgents do against a CVN, nada. Due the USS Cole bombing, All naval ships were upgraded with Mk-38 to counter threats from small boats The CVN can attack at will and insurgents cant do anything about it
    1
  219.  @logicomega7  Its called reality there ding ding The USN knew the threat of H-6 with YJ-12 was real one H-6 carries 4 missiles and multiple H-6s can attack from various directions thats was a real threat DFs on the other hand are not For starters there is no hiding when one is launched point blank
    1
  220.  @newsieboys1171  How about no Ballistic missile have long range however they are one use items. The DF-21 ASBM claims 900 miles however CVN can destroy DF-21s with ease while the DF-21 cannot While the CVN current level of capabilities makes this process very resource intensive but impossible, future weapons make the DFs moot A carrier based hypersonic weapon will F-18s to service DF- sites from as far 1000 miles away
    1
  221.  @kabbythedog9409  Russia's supposed weapons aint doing shit in Ukraine
    1
  222. Ukraine getting Patriot, NASAMS and IRIS-T is why you dont see the Su-57 trying its luck
    1
  223. Its made in china nuff said
    1
  224.  @Mrdardas99  Talking logistics The US made Stryker only weighs 19 tons , the ACV , 24 tons and the LAV-25 13 tons Basically similar vehicles are 12-25 tons at most which logistically is easier to move
    1
  225.  @harveywallbanger3123  If you need to rapid deploy 60 tones is major issue whereas 12-25 is not if the vehicle is damaged against moving 60 tonnes requires specialized movers or other Namers or tanks moving 12-25 ton is very easy to do
    1
  226.  @Mrdardas99  You can haul them on trucks but lighter options are easier
    1
  227.  @harveywallbanger3123  The Namer armor too many trade offs its high grade protection but at also at a cost
    1
  228. Its not a tank its armored fighting vehicle My only gripe is that it seems that the Army is wasting the 50mm cannon as the MPF carries a 105mm
    1
  229. Simple H and K
    1
  230. Just going to stop you right there Russian jamming is working in Ukraine because Ukraine has not means of effectively dealing with it Secondly, the US military has several other munitions that can do the job The JDAM is normally the simple route but not the only GBU-53s are immune to jamming for example
    1
  231. True diesel are quiet when they are battery power however its highly unlikely that this sub would achieve that even with help from Russia Diesel weakness is that they have to be refueled The odds of this sub getting far is highly unlikely unless it went on a one way trip or they arranged a clandestine civilian ship tanker to act as refueling ship The latter seems more likely but still difficult to arrange without outside help
    1
  232. If Ukraine gets enough to create an integrated air defence system (IADS) it will make a major difference
    1
  233. C-UAS for modern armor is simple 25mm or 30mm cannon with programmable air burst munitions and EW As for trying to counter mines thats iffy you can design the hull better and improve sensors but mines are not easily dealt with
    1
  234. There is a lot bad information here so lets clear that up First the Kiowa role became moot due to increase use of drones and advances in technology. Small drones like RQ-5 and RQ-7 which could loiter for 6 plus hours. The newer MQ-1C can loiter for over 24 hours The OH-58 could only loiter for 2 hours. The AH-64E has the capability to control UAV. This allows them receive information as the UAV sees The OH-58 had no data link capability nor could it share imagery. It had to radio back to command post. Secondly drone units can be deploy much faster and easier than OH-58 They can be packed up in C-130 and flown to where ever they are needed. The AH-64D/E long bow radar was also another factor as it can target further than the OH-58 can see The AH-64D/E received a number upgrades that moot the OH-58 moot The greatness irony was the RAH-66 was the perfect replacement for the OH-58 The Bell 360 is waste of time if they are serious about it, then need to develop an EO/IR/AESA mast for it
    1
  235.  @andreisouzabento7506  Lets recap you claim propaganda yet Russia warns United States against sending more arms to Ukraine funny how that works
    1
  236. Massive security failure against the board
    1
  237. Thats really a moot point the US didnt leave anything that show stopping
    1
  238. Actually you can keep all 12 out They just rarely do it
    1
  239. If the USMC adopts 105mm variant as well make the LAV-25 I would say the ACV would be huge success
    1
  240.  @williamzk9083  The Spike is most modern missile
    1
  241. Try more like 3 hundred problems
    1
  242. They can do it if given the right weapons
    1
  243. Well here the rub its called cost The AT-4 is $1500 wheres a Javelin is 175K per missile and the Carl Gustaf is $500 to $3000 per missile The AT-4 is simply cheaper While Carl Gustaf and Javelin gives Special forces options , your rank and file boots dont need the Carl Gustaf and Javelin keep it simple and give em AT-4s The only thing they need to do is extend the range of the AT-4 to at least 1500 m The Carl Gustaf has long range round but pretty sure that expensive as hell
    1
  244. Interesting to see if this makes to NATO standard
    1
  245. Sorry but you are not going to find a major defense company without a degree of corruption Its literally how they work most of the time Back in the day, it was the wild wild west Today, they are more under the radar with it but they still get exposed from time to time
    1
  246.  @xxxlonewolf49  It was not the DShK, it was the PKM and yes both are why regulars forces are getting the Carl Gustaf replace M72 and AT4 as it can match both the DShK and PKM range The 338 does allow them to equal range but still needed some to resolve the issue in one shot
    1
  247.  @xxxlonewolf49  That would be wrong The PKM not the DhSk was most common used by insurgent forces Special forces use the MK-48 Mod 0/1 not the M240 Mk-48 range is 875 yards as it has the shorter barrel vs the PKM range of 1094
    1
  248.  @jaypee389  The problem with 20mm is that there were doubts that it could produce lethal enough fragmentation per round 25mm on up no issue about producing lethal enough fragmentation
    1
  249.  @jaypee389  its not about rpm its doing max damage with just one round
    1
  250. Its more like , sorry fellas nothing personal but its the new administration
    1
  251. THAAD, SM-3, SM-6 and GBI make up US missile defense PAC-3 are technically part of it but the PATRIOT is needs a new missile
    1
  252.  @RootzRockBand  America is not insulated by being surrounded by oceans. America is insulated by the fact that gun ownership is constitutional right Think honestly, does China and Russia really wanna set foot on country of gun toting lunatics Country with the most PMCs A massive list of defense contractors In addition even more lunatics
    1
  253. No no and heck no Lemme put stop to 100-400 mil nonsense At the height of the WW2 , the US army size was 8 mil , during Vietnam was 3-4 mil and Cold war 1-4 to 2.5 mil in size This modern warfare not WW2 During WW2 , you need 100-200 bombers to have a 90 percent chance of hitting the target Today most targets one plane one target To destroy a tank or armor required a 4-12 personnel Again 1 missile 1 target While the EU and other countries have banned cluster munitions , US and China still reserve the right to use them Numbers dont matter when 1 munition can easily thin out the enemy's numbers
    1
  254. Thats true but time is one thing they can't give Ukraine Ultimately in order to drive Russia out of Ukraine, Ukraine need 3 pieces The first is knocking out the remaining surface combatants and 4 Kilo class subs of the Black Sea fleet Why that matters, without those ships, Russia's ability to strike from the sea neutralized, Russia's ability to blockade Ukraine also done Russian forces resupplying from ships , again gone. Taking out the Black Sea assets would be massive blow to Russian operations in Ukraine For this they need long range precision strike capability. While the HIMARS missiles have 200lbs warhead,, the Harpoon 487lbs does more destruction per missile Why the Harpoon The newer blocks of the Harpoon have both land and sea attack capability and range between 75 to 150 miles. Besides have 3 times the range of the HIMARS M31s but slightly shorter than the ATACMS, the key advantage to Harpoon is that launchers on trucks are quad packed. With ATACMS its 1 on HIMARS and 2 on the M270 The Harpoon coastal units carry 4 missiles. , So with the Harpoon , you more missiles per launcher The Harpoon's ability to attack both land and sea targets give Ukraine the ability to neutralize the black sea fleet as well strike other high value targets on land As the Harpoon's warhead is like dropping GBU-12 The next piece is integrated air defence system (IADS) With IADS, It puts the already strained Russian aviation assets in difficult position as well provides protection against cruise missile attacks These first two , Ukraine forces can get in short order but if this drags on, then Ukraine can get the last piece at which point Russian is done The last piece is their aviation assets Missiles are good but aircraft are better The only plane for this job is the F-16 and its amazing simple The F-16 has the CART CFT which allows to use drogue instead of boom which means that Ukrainian air force cause Su-27s as tankers The Ukrainian air force only need 5 weapons, AIM-9Rs and AIM-120C-5 which are both late 90s tech so even if they ended up in Russian hands they are still decades out dated, AGM-65s and GBU-10/12/16 and AGM-84 again , the US has plenty of older models from the late 90s that wouldnt betray anything to Russia if they got their hands on it. Same goes for the 20mm gun. The F-16 is also LANTRIN capable which is still in use and again old tech If Ukraine gets all of these its game over for Russian forces
    1
  255. The JLTV is definitely a step in right direction. but
    1
  256.  @Buck123four  Here's the reason why https://www.leonardodrs.com/sitrep/q1-2017-ausa-global-force-symposium-expo-special-edition/reconfigurable-integrated-weapons-platform-riwp/ Reconfigurable Integrated-weapons Platform (RIwP) can mount just any thing on the top of JTLV which mean endless options for the USMC http://www.military-today.com/artillery/hawkeye.htm Now if they could make this a little more compact, the USMC would jump on it CH-53K can carry Humvees internally but Hawkeye gun sits too high when its stowed if they can get it a little lower https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/24326
    1
  257.  @utoobuser206  The JTLV size can be configured with various type of weapon in dual or tri configurations Example a JTLV with optics, 30mm cannon and quad Javelin launcher too heavy for Humvee but light weight for JTLVs While the CH-53K and CH-47 can internally carry Humvee Smaller specially made like this Quad buggy https://www.army-technology.com/news/rafael-air-deployable-missile-launcher/ takes up less space and allows for more to be carried There is just no niche left for the humvee
    1
  258. Iran can a small area while the US can strike every where
    1
  259. Thats fine and dandy but they better make sure to applying the lessons learned from Ukraine
    1
  260. The USN need to follow through with the SSGN and make 4-8 for Columbias conventional operations
    1
  261.  @Predator42ID  SPC wasnt made for general purpose use but time will tell
    1
  262.  @LRRPFco52  I prefer 7.62mm over 5.56 Granted 7.62 is strong for CQB but its still a better round
    1
  263.  @2Potates  That would make the rounds lighter not more effective
    1
  264.  @adamparker9765  The change from 30.06 to 7.62 was simply logistics at the time they has so many different type of weapons in in They were consolidating everything but I agree that the change from 7.62 to 5.56 was most definitely botched
    1
  265. Stalemate
    1
  266. Too easy for modern ATGMs
    1
  267.  @rapahandock  No again Brought for Ukraine There are several pieces of enough equipment that the US brought before hand for Ukraine
    1
  268.  @Birdylockso  The US uses retired ICBM and MRBM first and second stages
    1
  269. The French navy wont be a factor Turkey can't allow them to enter and their Missile de Croisière Naval (MdCN) which is their version of the US TLAM has considerably shorter range From the Aegean sea to Ukraine is 690 miles and I dont see Turkey or Bulgaria allow France to lob missiles over their territory
    1
  270. Yeah not happening 105mm , no way 30mm to 40mm at best
    1
  271. With newer weapons, the B-21 doesnt need a massive payload
    1
  272.  kittycat3015  Cry harder Chinese bot
    1
  273. ​ kittycat3015  "Here begs the question, why build such expensive plane? It is useless against Russia and China. For other opponents" Simple the idiot who wrote the question has literally no idea what he talking about because ​ kittycat3015 moronic ass never heard of SEAD , EW and Aerial decoys Apparently they dont exist
    1
  274.  kittycat3015  Cry harder its hilarous
    1
  275.  @benhudson4145  Don't with the bother He conveniently cant tell difference between his ass and a whole in wall
    1
  276.  @benhudson4145  I warned you he was clueless
    1
  277.  @voidtempering8700  Ukraine has been sending all high value equipment that they capture to West The West has the capability to analyze the equipment light years faster than Ukraine and can provide insight in a matter of days
    1
  278. How bad just look how well things are not going for them in Ukraine
    1
  279. The F-22 has to be cancelled now to make room for the NGAD There is no getting around that fact now
    1
  280. It is but it also past its time The smart and sensible option is to shelve the F-22 for the NGAD as well as speed up key weapons
    1
  281. The fact is that with the rapid advance of light but lethal weapon on ground and air asks the question is armor of any use any more?
    1
  282. A dual turrent with twin 125mm would be possible however the amount of armor it could carry would make it combat ineffective against other tanks 10 rounds at most per gun with 125mm rounds, if they dropped it down to 100mm , would get more rounds but still ineffective against modern armor but at the end of the day what use is any tank against the SK or the US The US military pioneered tank plinking which dropping 500lbs GBUs on tanks and SK has the latest US ATGMs
    1
  283. Hell in a hand basket
    1
  284. The key difference is that the West is going the Ukraine everything it needs
    1
  285. What ever the Panstir uses its not working in Ukraine
    1
  286. Iran's strike revealed that their only offensive capability is missiles and drones Israel's strike revealed that the Israeli air force can easily penetrate Iran air space and strike without any warning The difference is that Iran's attack can be easily countered once defenses are aware that means they get one surprise attack and after that they are basically useless Israel's attack shows that the IAF can strike any time any where regardless The fact the Israel targeted Iran air defense equipment mean that Israel can cripple Iran's defense allowing for follow up strikes from other weapons The down side for Israel is that they have shown they will make use of the from the med to through Syria and Iraq to strike Iran which means that Iran is going to likely beef up defenses on the border but Israel can take a few pages out of the US playbook to deal with that
    1
  287. Its pretty simple figure out Unless someone develops a power like ARC reactor EM armor is not viable
    1
  288. it would be but thats waste The better option for drones is 25mm canon with air burst rounds and leave aircraft to SHORAD
    1
  289. The rationale likely they want to test out a number of technologies for the NGAD on the F-22
    1
  290. The US doesnt need to up gun its tanks The critical factor you are missing is the European air power is very limited while the US has unlimited air power In Europe, there is total combined force 300 plus gunships, The Apaches, Tigers and Mangusta between several countries The US Army and USMC combined for over 1000, A single F-15E can carry up 28 GBU-53s and strike package of 4 is 112 The GBU-53 can accurately target enemy targets to the point where by the time the enemy encounters US forces, most or all their heavy armor is damaged or destroyed Lastly, the US is adopted the SPIKE NLOS on the JLTV which destroy a tank from 20 miles active protection system (APS) can only stop weapons of certain mass FGM-148 weighs 50bs while SPIKE NLOS weighs 150lbs plus and 204lbs Also remember that the US coined tank plinking where they dropping 500lbs bombs on Iraqi tanks Air power forces on enemy tanks and leaves infantry fighting vehicles to Abrams both may have APS but the Abrams heavy armor can withstand a few hits but AFV/IFV armor is no match 120mm HEAT round
    1
  291. Its moot at the end of the day because the tech that was left was not that big of deal as politician's tried over hype The US left obsolete tech
    1
  292. I say no for field use because too much get go wrong wit it. However for base defense, its great idea
    1
  293. The issue with the LCS is simple mismanagement. The Freedom class should have taken on the LCS role while the Independence class took over the FFG- role The Independence class of the two was the design with the most growth
    1
  294. Simple, piss poor leadership
    1
  295. its pretty simple to understand Despite all efforts, the lightest 50 cal machine comes at 53lbs with a mount there was simple no way to make 50 cal machine gun light enough to be truly man portable So they started looking at calibers between 7.62mm up to 50 cal to see if they could find a happy medium I wouldnt be surprise if we started see more sniper and big game rounds being tested for use in machine guns to help deal with the increase use of body armor but honestly they need to dust of the XM25 CDTE fast
    1
  296. Not even close Ukraine is showing the value of the Apache systems compared to Russian systems which are barely performing
    1
  297.  @fatdaddy1996  No one offered the AH-64 to Ukraine They only thing Ukraine has asked for for is UH-60s
    1
  298. Does it work nope
    1
  299. Carriers will never be obsolete even when facing advanced weapons
    1
  300. Ultimately, I believe why it was abandoned is that one you can double tap with ATGMs Striking the same spot in rapid Two solid rounds like Sabos wouldnt be affected by it Three, shear kinetic force would destroy the plate
    1
  301. @@sheldonfords9637 No it is, but IR tracking range is still short compared to radar
    1
  302.  @julianpetkov8320  lay off the potato juice The US chose to intercept the ballon when it was safe to do this US not Russian Putting the population needlessly at risk would not have gone over well
    1
  303. Honestly I think they testing out tech for next gen
    1
  304. At the end of the day, still doesn't change the fact that Iran is still a shit show of a country
    1
  305. China and Russia's programs are simply to give them a possible defense option against the US Without hypersonic weapons, Neither China or Russia can match the US in conventional warfare Now the US program is design to give the US a means of breaking through Russia's and China IADS quickly While they can't match the US conventionally, both their IADS still represent an obstacle that has to be dealt with China's problem is that their DFs are massive launchers The US Common-Hypersonic Glide Body or LRHW can be travel up to Mach 17 and launched from 1700 miles away Even at 1000 miles, it will reach a DF launcher in 5 mins , how far can DF move in 5 min not that far The older TLAM needs 2 hours to cover that distance So USN ship with LRHW can engage both Chinese DFs as well as their IADS The ARRW claims 1000 miles but actual speed is not known yet but both systems attack Chinese assets would be too much for China to handle While China's missile that did a lap around the world is impressive, Unless it can simultaneously 10 plus targets, its basically moot Russia's system too easy to make fun of
    1
  306. Good ole German engineering
    1
  307. Ultimately in order to drive Russia out of Ukraine, Ukraine need 3 pieces The first is knocking out the remaining surface combatants and 4 Kilo class subs of the Black Sea fleet Why that matters, without those ships, Russia's ability to strike from the sea neutralized, Russia's ability to blockade Ukraine also done Russian forces resupplying from ships , again gone. Taking out the Black Sea assets would be massive blow to Russian operations in Ukraine For this they need long range precision strike capability. While the HIMARS missiles have 200lbs warhead,, the Harpoon 487lbs does more destruction per missile Why the Harpoon The newer blocks of the Harpoon have both land and sea attack capability and range between 75 to 150 miles. Besides have 3 times the range of the HIMARS M31s but slightly shorter than the ATACMS, the key advantage to Harpoon is that launchers on trucks are quad packed. With ATACMS its 1 on HIMARS and 2 on the M270 The Harpoon coastal units carry 4 missiles. , So with the Harpoon , you more missiles per launcher The Harpoon's ability to attack both land and sea targets give Ukraine the ability to neutralize the black sea fleet as well strike other high value targets on land As the Harpoon's warhead is like dropping GBU-12 The next piece is integrated air defence system (IADS) With IADS, It puts the already strained Russian aviation assets in difficult position as well provides protection against cruise missile attacks The last piece is their aviation assets If Ukraine get long range strike capability with the Harpoon and a functioning IADS, that gives them time for the last piece Missiles are good but aircraft are better The only plane for this job is the F-16 and its amazing simple The F-16 has the CART CFT which allows to use drogue instead of boom which means that Ukrainian air force cause Su-27s as tankers The Ukrainian air force only need 5 weapons, AIM-9Rs and AIM-120C-5 which are both late 90s tech so even if they ended up in Russian hands they are still decades out dated, AGM-65s and GBU-10/12/16 and AGM-84 again , the US has plenty of older models from the late 90s that wouldnt betray anything to Russia if they got their hands on it. Same goes for the 20mm gun. The F-16 is also LANTRIN capable which is still in use and again old tech If Ukraine gets all of these its game over for Russian forces
    1
  308.  @Swedester  The B-2 introduction was 1997 The USAF has been advocating a new bomber since 1999 , they released the Air Force White Paper on Long Range Bombers that year You are forgetting that the original plan for the B-2 was165 planes to completely replace both B-1s and B-52 Ironically while the USAF is committed to replacing the B-1 and B-2 , The B-52 retirement is still out of question The Buff simply can't be replaced yet
    1
  309.  @hamzamahmood9565  Considering that USAF has been asking since 1999
    1
  310.  @Matt-yg8ub  Not Lockheed's fault they were prepared Boeing's downfall was that their X-32 was literally crap
    1
  311.  @Matt-yg8ub  Which was silly to begin considering the nature of the JSF program That made sense for the F-22 and ATF program not for the JSF
    1
  312.  @Matt-yg8ub  That would incorrect The F-22 had nothing to do with F-35 The people in the positions at the time were incompetent jackasses Both SecDef and Pres never served a day in the military and were cancelling programs just to supposedly save money
    1
  313.  @Matt-yg8ub  No clowns with no experience canx the F-22 The reason why the F-22 cost was expensive because dropped procurement from 750 to 183 The USAF fought for 381 but clowns dropped it to 187 which greatly increased its cost if they had kept the 381 figure A lot problems wouldnt exist
    1
  314.  @Matt-yg8ub  The Zumwlat is another example congressional stupidity The USN told congress they didn't need naval gunfire however congress as usual thought they knew better and the USN ended up wasting the Zumwalt class
    1
  315.  @Matt-yg8ub  The AGS flaw was them not making it compatible with USMC and Army 155mm rounds naval gunfire capability died when missiles like the AGM-84E/H/K SLAM/ER were developed while the Maverick was precise, its range was still too short longer range missiles allow aircraft to strike targets at longer range with great precision GBU-39/54 are another stand off weapon that made naval gunfire capability moot The other factor is the increasing range of coastal defenses
    1
  316.  @Taskandpurpose  Its hard to take Russia seriously when they have lost 4 flag officers in 3 weeks of war The US lost General Greene in 2014, General Maude in 2001 and Admiral Robinson in 1972 Yet in 3 weeks Russia has lost more flag officers than US has in 50 years ?
    1
  317.  @bradleyperry1735  That would be false In 91 for example Gen Myatt led 1st MARDIV from the front line Gen Kelly in 2003 with Task for Tripoli as well Gen Petareus with 101st General Swannack and General John Abizaid were attacked by insurgents forces in Fallujah 2004 There is no difference US generals have been just as close to the action as Russia generals The fact is that US traveled 7000 miles to Iraq twice and 9 to Afghan and only lost 1 flag officer in 20 plus year of conflicts yet Russia loses 4 in 3 weeks
    1
  318.  @bradleyperry1735  This most definitely low-intensity conflict Full scale war involving competing air forces No happening here armor vs armor , again not happening major naval and air engagements, again no about 80 percent of what goes on in all conflict is not happening here
    1
  319.  @bradleyperry1735  IDF attack is barely happen what major naval engagement has happened what major air battle has happened fighting on the ground does not meet the require for full scale war the emphasis is scale all across the air , sea and land thats what full scale means
    1
  320.  @ORaddlyispissedoff  its not baffling its just pure propaganda Putin's claim was that NATO would put bases in Ukraine which would threaten Moscow however the world already knew that was 100 percent bullshit Yesterday when Russia used a Kinzhal , it confirmed that everything Putin had said was a lie. Tu-22M3M can literally launch a Kinzhal from Moscow and strike London in 10 minutes Thats 1553 miles From Moscow to Kyiv is 459 miles thats literally 3 min From Russia border is 1 min 52 sec So Russia has to capability to strike targets in the EU in under 10 mins as well most targets in Ukraine under 3 minutes but demands neutrality from Ukraine what does that say about Russia's claims about its S-400 and S-500 system as well as the Kinzhal
    1
  321. The fact is that with the rapid advance of light but lethal weapon on ground and air asks the question is armor of any use any more
    1
  322.  @csnation  Again missiles outrange cannons and HMGs The JTLV heavy gun carriers does the same job as IFV at fraction of the cost
    1
  323.  @davidgoodnow269  Thats very iffy
    1
  324.  @davidgoodnow269  No thats very iffy nor is being tested First M197 rpm is 1500 while the M61 is over 4500 rpm. So for starters, its considerably slower Secondly there is no software issue between the AH-1Z and AEGIS The software is Virtualized Aegis Weapon System (VAWS) and its been around for since 2014 The software is designed for cueing missiles not playing CIWS Lastly, Raytheon isnt refusing anything Siemens now THALES makes the Goalkeeper CIWS which a completely different system from the Mk-15 The Mk-15 is far more widely used than Goalkeeper
    1
  325.  @snubbybinky4460  The Apache still has the edge with technology
    1
  326.  @davidgoodnow269  Again the AH-1Z can not be used for CIWS, point blank VAWS design so the missile can be fired and updated via datalink enroute to target which is literally 3 to 5 seconds firing The AH-1Z has get in position, the FCS has plot a track and the gun adjust ,thats 20 to 30 seconds if they lucky The only asset that will use the VAWS is the F-35 because allow them to stop the target long before it becomes a threat As for the MK-15 and Goalkeeper again False The MK-15 was built by General Dynamics GD sold that part of their company in to Hughes in 1995 who in turn was brought by Raytheon in 1997 There was no refusal by Raytheon, just another tall tale The Phalanx is on Block 1B Block-1-1988 Block- 1A1999 Block-1B 2010 Everything you said about the MK-15 is just tall tale
    1
  327.  @hyokkim7726  Cost effective doesnt factor in The CVNs can use Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) with F-35C, F-18s , E2-D and FA/XX For LHA/D which operate away from CVNs, the VAWS with F-35B is literally the only option
    1
  328.  @hyokkim7726  We are nearly 2 years into this war and where are Russian forces on Kyiv doorstep-Nope 100 miles away, Nope Russian forces are still very going nowhere In Sept, Ukraine struck the Black Fleet Sea twice, Destroying one sub, crippling a ship and leveling Black Fleet HQ Being of Nov, destroyed a Corevette ATACMS opening act was shredding two Russian bases well as nearly 20 helicopters Nearly half of Russia's KA-52 have been destroyed ATACMS strikes have majorly demoralized Russian forces as the ATACMS payloads are designed to shred both personnel and equipment And its only getting worst
    1
  329.  @davidgoodnow269  Again no ding dong The Cobra's gun is manually operated, there is no automatic control for Slew-to-Cue (STC) targeting Secondly if the Cobra is already in position is absolute dumbest comment and why the USMC isnt doing this nonsense With F-35, position doesnt matter, if the F-35 is airborne , all it has to do is recieve the target info, point its nose and fire with the AIM-120D, thats over 80 miles vs trying to engage 2-3 miles being silly The Goalkeeper achieves literally nothing point blank as its never been used in actual combat The Goalkeeper will never replace the Phalanx nor was it ever considered First, complete installation weights 21K where Phalanx weights just 13K The Goalkeeper uses the less common GAU-8 whereas the Phalanx uses very common M61 As result, the Goalkeeper costs 25 mil while the Phalanx costs just 12 mil But most importantly, the Goalkeeper 30mm cost over $60 on up while Phalanx rounds $30 on down depending on rounds Very few modern ships use the Goalkeeper while the Phalanx is planned for newer ships Simple facts
    1
  330.  @hyokkim7726  All I hear from you is whine whine and more whine
    1
  331.  @mark4371  Thats why the Apache is equipping the dual guided JAGM and Spike NLOS In situations where the longbow cant get a target lock the JAGM and Spike NLOS are immune to jamming The JAGM has both SAL and MMW The Sike NLOS is IR/EO More the point, Lockheed has developed a newer variant of the JAGM with tri-mode seeker
    1
  332.  @mrgrinch837  Apache were in Iraq twice and the Afghan Lesson learned from those conflicts is why it wouldnt have the Ka-52 and Mi-28s problems The Ka-52 is over 60 losses now and Mi-28 are getting higher Russia has even admitted that the use of the LMUR missile has slowed down their losses
    1
  333.  @mrgrinch837  They fly high because they have no choice The Apache with the longbow radar Hellfire-L can fire from a concealed position without having to unmask Operations in Iraq and Afghan revealed vulnerabilities in the Apache's armor and design Hence why the Apaches stand capabilities were improved as well as the ability to receive images from UAV. The incident in 2007 when an Apache fired on a news crew is what prompted the Army to require Boeing develop full color sensors for Apaches
    1
  334.  @slavisaasus  There is a lot of the F-117 shoot down but at the end of the day, it was still a massive gift for the US military
    1
  335.  @BojanPeric-kq9et  Without Serbia, the shortcomings of stealth and other factors would have never been discovered but most importantly Allied Force was directed by NATO not the US
    1
  336. Well as long Ukraine lay off the direct engagements and keep going after Russia supply lines, it should keep them bottled up for now but they up the ante and hit other critical targets
    1
  337. The Freedom class should have taken on the LCS role while the Independence class took over the FFG- role The Independence class of the two was the design with the most growth The USN's mistake with the Constellation is not giving the ability to use the SM-3 and SM-6
    1
  338. I see being replaced by either HK416 or the XM-7
    1