A scrimmage in a Border Station
A canter down some dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail
http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg
http://cimsec.org/sea-control-97-fal...key-ward/19236
Their whole series on the Falklands is great, worth getting on iTunes.
Good comparison-and-contrast on what sort of value we're getting for our defense dollar.
America's new Zumwalt-class DDG-1000 destroyer is a marvel of engineering.
Sixty percent bigger than the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers it was designed to replace, but just as fast as a DDG-51 and featuring a stealthier design, Zumwalt touts two 155-millimeter guns, can carry a combination of 80 Tomahawk, Sea Sparrow, and ASROC missiles, and is one of the few warships in the U.S. fleet capable of producing enough power to operate the new railgun and laser cannon weaponry just starting to come on line.
But Zumwalt is not cheap.
Although it was initially designed in 1998 with the intention of producing 32 warships for a total cost of $36.9 billion (including R&D costs), a combination of cost overruns and procurement cuts have sent per-ship costs skyrocketing. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, each of the Zumwalt-class ships now under construction, expected to cost $1.2 billion to build, will instead cost $7.5 billion.
That's more than half the cost of a Ford-class aircraft carrier, and a big price to swallow and get only a destroyer in return. So it's little wonder that, with costs spiraling out of control, the Pentagon pulled the plug on the Zumwalt program in 2009, ordering a halt to production after just three ships.
But now there's a new threat on the horizon that could convince the Navy it can't afford not to build more Zumwalts.
http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...satellite.aspx
A scrimmage in a Border Station
A canter down some dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail
http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg
The term lightweight is a catalyst for all manner of projects intended to benefit military operations, for example the Combat Lightweight Automatic Weapon System (CLAWS) and the Lightweight Dismounted Automatic Machine Gun (LDAM).
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...r-machine-gun/
recently highlighted a project – not apparently CLAWS but possibly LDAM - to develop a replacement .50cal MG for the classic .50cal M2 HB and as improved with QCB. Just possibly that project might be intended to also replace the derivative M3 with its higher maximum ROF.
The item’s reporter was unimpressed for several reasons not explained with all details on weights, although he did quote it is hoped to “save 16-pounds off of a 26-pound barrel”. As a summary of some of his concerns, the M2 which covers only part of the overall requirement for support MGs is bulky and with heavyweight tripod weights 128 lb, reducing to 106 lb with lightweight tripod. Keeping the M2 supplied with ammunition is burdensome – at about 28 lb for a 100-round belt without packaging - so it is often employed as a vehicle weapon. And when offloaded or back-packed by infantry it routinely needs logistic support from vehicles.
With the M2 in service as a reliable, well regarded and widely employed MG there is little point in spending development dollars on a new .50cal medium ROF MG or even just a lightweight barrel. A heavier barrel with less need for changing out on vehicles could be better value.
In somewhat the same vein the US Army has an Extended Range Cannon Artillery project to replace 39 calibre barrels by 52 calibre barrels in all its 155mm howitzers.
http://defense-update.com/20160329_m777er.html
That is intended to increase their maximum reach of about 30,000 yd to about 50,000 yd. And it includes a 52 calibre barrel that will increase the 9,300 lb weight of the towed M777 howitzer by some 1,000 lb. The M777 was quite recently developed with a part titanium carriage to obtain lightweight heli-portable support fire. The concepts for deep battle may in addition to rocket and missile artillery and attack helicopters demand long range barrels on self-propelled howitzers. However, heavying up any of the M777s for intermittent and punishing high pressure use seems illogical.
The US Army must already have procedures to ensure redundant and nugatory projects are shut out or down at an early gate. But the gate guardians could be trapped in a procedural bog or have in some other way gone missing. If either of those circumstances apply it could be appropriate to start and promptly implement a higher level weight reduction project.
Last edited by Compost; 05-05-2016 at 11:25 AM. Reason: change phrasing
"I Wore a $400,000 F-35 Helmet and It Blew My Mind"
http://gizmodo.com/i-wore-a-400-000-...ind-1779125567
A scrimmage in a Border Station
A canter down some dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail
http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg
http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/o...oon/ar-AAhAvmZDamage done by laser weapons is a function of power and time. The longer a laser can stay on a target, like a drone or an incoming missile, the more damage it can do. The more powerful that laser is, the less time it needs to spend burning its target. The U.S. Navy already has a 30-kilowatt laser mounted on a ship. Yesterday, at a summit on directed energy weapons in Washington, D.C., the Navy announced it plans to go bigger: 150 kilowatts.
National Defense Magazine writes:
The Office of Naval Research “will perform a shipboard test of a 150-killowatt laser weapon system in the near future,” said [vice chief of naval operations] Adm. Bill Moran during a speech at Booz Allen Hamilton’s Directed Energy Summit, which was held in Washington, D.C.
Last edited by AdamG; 07-06-2016 at 01:58 PM. Reason: USN needs more sharks
A scrimmage in a Border Station
A canter down some dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail
http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg
Bookmarks