Military Tech Thread

[TaiidanTomcat]

I agree there is no established rule of war going nuclear, (MAD still exists though, even if it's not really brought up between the US and Russia) but logic or illogic in the minds of the side that may feel it's losing will almost certainly invoke said rule of tossing its nukes.

Any person(s) in government who feel they can wage war with other top powers and feel victory will be at hand IS A FOOL! We should be scared *hitless of them. They are the most dangerous of leaders.

Wars are deescalated if they are not seen as global or potentially global wars. Proxies, secret wars, piss pot illegal wars, can all be deescalated in time as noted. But start a grievous war between the USA, Russia and or China and it will GO NUCLEAR!

Next, I don't base my life's outlook on a movie, but Ryback's quote in said movie is more correct than not.

The governments you, I, we all see each day are the public governments. But working in secret as the string pullers are the often sick minded people, who are lustful, power hungry, greed hands. They operate generally in the shadows and sadly I believe suffer from a level of grand myopia and grand self delusions. History is pockmarked with their misguided follies and errors. But they are heartless beasts and DON'T GIVE A RATS A**, especially with those who suffer. They are masters at spin and can often keep a public blind and even willing to do their favours without much if any a question asked.

Now I'll send you all back your regular programming, it's easier for most that way. Tune into American Idol, So You Think You Can Dance, Big Brother and or Survivor and such. All are good at general distractions from such darkness in our governments.

We asked you to stop not double down .

And for the Record, MAD was never an adopted Russian Doctrine, and the US switched away from it in the mid 1970s to Flexible Response.

Now stop projecting your pop culture stupidity on others and go watch another Die Hard rip off. Your ignorance of what you speak of is not welcome here

Edited December 6, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat

[TaiidanTomcat]

Gordon - Please spare us your political viewpoints. I started this thread simply as a means to discuss modern weapons systems. Too many interesting threads have ended up being locked due to politics being introduced.

If you want to share your opinions with the rest of the ARC community, start your own thread. Otherwise, keep your politics out of this one.

THIS^

[Don]

...the string pullers are the often sick minded people, who are lustful, power hungry, greed hands...sadly I believe suffer from a level of grand myopia and grand self delusions. History is pockmarked with their misguided follies and errors. But they are heartless beasts and DON'T GIVE A RATS A**, especially with those who suffer. They are masters at spin and can often keep a public blind and even willing to do their favours without much if any a question asked...

Perhaps the best summation of todays mainstream media ^^^.

[11bee]

Ok.. now that we are hopefully done with airing our political viewpoints, interesting article on the new threats facing the US Army. Been focused for a long time on fighting cavemen with AK-47's and walkie-talkies. Next guy we come up against might be a bit more sophisticated.

Been used to seeing all those cool Predator airstrike videos, looks like some other folks know how to use UAV's.

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/12/10/advanced-russian-air-power-jammers-focus-us-troops/77090544/

[82Whitey51]

Ok.. now that we are hopefully done with airing our political viewpoints, interesting article on the new threats facing the US Army. Been focused for a long time on fighting cavemen with AK-47's and walkie-talkies. Next guy we come up against might be a bit more sophisticated.

Been used to seeing all those cool Predator airstrike videos, looks like some other folks know how to use UAV's.

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/12/10/advanced-russian-air-power-jammers-focus-us-troops/77090544/

Watching some of the videos posted up of the Russians at work in Syria is pretty eye opening. Not so much the bomb dropping, but the use of rocket artillery like the BM-30 Smerch. I'd think most grunts would view an IED as "bad" (and they are...) but holy schnikes....a Smerch barrage will really ruin your day...and that of hundreds of your friends.

I know we (U.S.) have equally devastating weapons on hand but for some reason we have not opted to use them in places like Iraq and Afghanistan...probably worried about what the rest of the world would think of us.

Edited December 14, 2015 by 82Whitey51

[11bee]

Watching some of the videos posted up of the Russians at work in Syria is pretty eye opening. Not so much the bomb dropping, but the use of rocket artillery like the BM-30 Smerch. I'd think most grunts would view an IED as "bad" (and they are...) but holy schnikes....a Smerch barrage will really ruin your day...and that of hundreds of your friends.

I know we (U.S.) have equally devastating weapons on hand but for some reason we have not opted to use them in places like Iraq and Afghanistan...probably worried about what the rest of the world would think of us.

Russia has always been a big fan of both massed tube and multiple rocket system artillery. They use these systems very effectively, especially (as the Ukrainians found out) for rapid counter-battery targeting and quick notice strikes against radio (ie - command center) emitters. As noted, they also don't appear to have the same ROE constraints that we have.

We've been cutting back on artillery for the last decade or so and in the bad old days, the units that we had left were often being deployed as infantry. Might be time to give this sector of our military renewed emphasis.

[fulcrum1]

Ok.. now that we are hopefully done with airing our political viewpoints, interesting article on the new threats facing the US Army. Been focused for a long time on fighting cavemen with AK-47's and walkie-talkies. Next guy we come up against might be a bit more sophisticated.

You might find this interesting........... http://warontherocks.com/2015/11/three-offsets-for-american-landpower-dominance/

[Check Six]

You might find this interesting........... http://warontherocks...ower-dominance/

IMHO; Recent events have unfolded to which an unusual alliance may reform to the likes we haven't seen since WWII.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Russia and the U.S. are basically fighting a common enemy: Radical Muslims. Just like we did in WWII, only it was the Germans then.

Russia has very little patience with said radicals. History has shown when said radicals mess with USSR/Russia, the response is deadly and thorough.

Since these radicals aren't going away anytime soon, I'm of the opinion that the premise of the article is now probably outdated. At least until said radical Muslims issue to put to rest. And I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I see an alliance being formed with Russia and the U.S. in dealing with this growing problem. Russia lives right next door to its epicenter and concern of said problem will only increase.

It's not if it will happen but rather when.

[11bee]

Russia and the U.S. are basically fighting a common enemy: Radical Muslims.

The fight against "Radical Muslims" is very much a secondary priority for Russia.

Russia has very little patience with said radicals. History has shown when said radicals mess with USSR/Russia, the response is deadly and thorough.

Absolutely. As was shown in Grozny (where in 1995 they lost more tanks then they did in Berlin, 1945) and their intervention in Afghanistan.

[11bee]

You might find this interesting........... http://warontherocks.com/2015/11/three-offsets-for-american-landpower-dominance/

I'd seen that article before. It's interesting but a bit too Tom Clacy-ish for me. Hopefully things are in better shape then they appear. From an earlier article on this website -

As the U.S. Army fielded Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles to protect soldiers against improvised explosive devices, Russia and China developed longer-range precision ground attack, sea, and air attack capabilities that create a multi-domain anti-access/area-denial threat.

Can't blame our military, they had troops deployed that desperately needed MRAP's and all the other systems that are critical in a counter-insurgency conflict but are of limited use against a more advanced adversary. We've got state of the art heavily armored trucks (although with nothing more than a grenade launcher or .50 MG for firepower) but are still using tank and IFV designs that are ~ 40 years old.

[fulcrum1]

I'd seen that article before. It's interesting but a bit too Tom Clacy-ish for me. Hopefully things are in better shape then they appear. From an earlier article on this website -

As the U.S. Army fielded Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles to protect soldiers against improvised explosive devices, Russia and China developed longer-range precision ground attack, sea, and air attack capabilities that create a multi-domain anti-access/area-denial threat.

Can't blame our military, they had troops deployed that desperately needed MRAP's and all the other systems that are critical in a counter-insurgency conflict but are of limited use against a more advanced adversary. We've got state of the art heavily armored trucks (although with nothing more than a grenade launcher or .50 MG for firepower) but are still using tank and IFV designs that are ~ 40 years old.

It's all a bit Tom Clancyish when it comes to imagining futuristic scenarios or improbable ones. The point is to get you to think and it ties into range. Where this article carries a bit more weight than some other pieces written over on warontherocks is the author, who is the heavy hitter in this field and to show that although you think the focus has been fighting goat herders the truth is that its just a small piece of a much larger pie. The demise of FA is the same thing that was said for AR and MPs, certain airframes not being used, not including some capabilities which led to articles being written by upset officers that they weren't properly utilized, etc. You raise and shape the force you need for the fight you're in and assume risk in other areas. The truth is our Artillery branch is in a solid position having gone back into the FA cannon batts and such which better enables focused organizational training and cert programs that provide flexible employment of Fires which is what the BDE Commander needs. At a higher echelon the DIVARTY will have no organic fires like say what you saw during Desert Storm but this can now be provided by a variety of FA Battalions both rocket and cannon along with other assets to accomplish its mission for the DIV Commander and the newer TAC model which goes live sometime next year using these batts with a combination of one to five rocket/missile (MLRS or HIMARS) and/or FA Cannon Battalions as well as other enablers. The DIVARTY will have a target acquisition plt which will field the newer -53 Radars and sync the sentinel and counterfire radars organic to the unit. We see this being played out time now. The hard part is not the equipment or capability its making 30K boots look like 300K.

The SECDEF at the time made the MRAP happen for the Army and Marines and push the fielding, it's not a counter-insurgency platform and has more uses against an advanced adversary than a 1151. The problem is its to heavy to make it a realistic option for expeditionary operations which is why we're getting a mix of the old with the new in the form of the JLTV.

[11bee]

The SECDEF at the time made the MRAP happen for the Army and Marines and push the fielding, it's not a counter-insurgency platform and has more uses against an advanced adversary than a 1151. The problem is its to heavy to make it a realistic option for expeditionary operations which is why we're getting a mix of the old with the new in the form of the JLTV.

Thanks for the info on the status of artillery, it's good info. Surprised about the uses for MRAP's beyond "brushfire wars". How are they being fielded? Are they organic to all divisions or just certain units? Aside from some of the smaller MRAP's, I wouldn't have thought they would be of much use in Europe and S. Korea.

[fulcrum1]

Thanks for the info on the status of artillery, it's good info. Surprised about the uses for MRAP's beyond "brushfire wars". How are they being fielded? Are they organic to all divisions or just certain units? Aside from some of the smaller MRAP's, I wouldn't have thought they would be of much use in Europe and S. Korea.

They're tda to BCT's. They don't support combined arms operations against a comparable conventional force in the full spectrum environment if that's what you're thinking.

[Check Six]

The fight against "Radical Muslims" is very much a secondary priority for Russia.

Absolutely. As was shown in Grozny (where in 1995 they lost more tanks then they did in Berlin, 1945) and their intervention in Afghanistan.

That may be true now. Russia getting involved as they are currently may very well change their priority.

I didn't know the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan due to a terrorist attack by them .

[Mfezi]

As was shown in Grozny (where in 1995 they lost more tanks then they did in Berlin, 1945)...

Hmmmmm....

Grozny 1994/1995: One estimate I have seen is that Russia lost 62 tanks and 163 other armoured vehicles. Another (Western) estimate says 225 armored vehicles including tanks. The worst day was on 31 December 1994 when they lost 20 of 26 tanks and 102 of 120 BMP's, as well as 6 of 6 ZSU-23's taking part.

Berlin 1945: Soviet losses was 1,997 tanks and 2,108 artillery pieces according to Wiki. Other estimates may differ but it was clearly a different order of magnitude than what Russia lost in Grozny.

[Alvis 3.1]

That may be true now. Russia getting involved as they are currently may very well change their priority.

I didn't know the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan due to a terrorist attack by them .

No, but they DID get involved due to radical Islam. Their guy in Kabul was cracking down wayyyyy too hard on what he considered radicalised Muslims in Afghanistan, and the Russians were concerned he was going too far. He was smart enough to refuse their invite to Moscow, so their option was to invade and take things over and smooth over the situation. (They were concerned any inflamation of tensions with Islam would boil over into their other southern Republics)

Yeah, that didn't work out so well, and it just escalated from that. It was taken as a grab to gain access to a warm water port (eventually) by the West, who then started to back anyone fighting the Russians.

Proxy wars, oh so fun in getting balls rolling that can't be stopped.

Alvis 3.1

[spejic]

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

[/size][/size]

This doesn't work any more. Iran is the enemy of America's enemy in Iraq and Syria. That doesn't make them America's friend.

There are a dozen sides, all of which do some things we want and some things we don't. It's a complicated problem to manage all of them. Each have their own agendas, and there's no reason to think any of their goals (or methods for getting those goals) are purely in the US's interests.

[Check Six]

This doesn't work any more. Iran is the enemy of America's enemy in Iraq and Syria. That doesn't make them America's friend.

There are a dozen sides, all of which do some things we want and some things we don't. It's a complicated problem to manage all of them. Each have their own agendas, and there's no reason to think any of their goals (or methods for getting those goals) are purely in the US's interests.

I see your points.

But I was specifically referring to Russia and the U.S. though.

[Check Six]

No, but they DID get involved due to radical Islam. Their guy in Kabul was cracking down wayyyyy too hard on what he considered radicalised Muslims in Afghanistan, and the Russians were concerned he was going too far. He was smart enough to refuse their invite to Moscow, so their option was to invade and take things over and smooth over the situation. (They were concerned any inflamation of tensions with Islam would boil over into their other southern Republics)

Yeah, that didn't work out so well, and it just escalated from that. It was taken as a grab to gain access to a warm water port (eventually) by the West, who then started to back anyone fighting the Russians.

Proxy wars, oh so fun in getting balls rolling that can't be stopped.

Alvis 3.1

Hmm, Very interesting.

Good points there.

[11bee]

Maybe we need to consider a "European Pivot"?

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/09/18/exclusive-the-pentagon-is-preparing-new-war-plans-for-a-baltic-battle-against-russia/?utm_content=buffera0e92&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Might take more than a Europe-based mech battalion to change the outcome of those war games.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Maybe we need to consider a "European Pivot"?

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/09/18/exclusive-the-pentagon-is-preparing-new-war-plans-for-a-baltic-battle-against-russia/?utm_content=buffera0e92&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Might take more than a Europe-based mech battalion to change the outcome of those war games.

Button's broken!

[Alan in Yorktown]

There is absolutely no rule that says nuclear armed states will engage in wholesale nuclear war, even when there is conventional war. I think a lot of that started with the ban the bombs folks but it persists to this day.

A few thoughts on nukes -

1. Was at a commander's call once ~2009 or so. CC asked question "How often does the US use nuclear weapons?"

Answer was "We use them every day."

2. One thing that WILL trigger a combat use of a nuke is replying to a nuke attack - assuming a appropriate target can be found.

I saw a launch facility once where the blast doors had a Dominoes pizza box logo w/ caption "Minuteman III - Guaranteed Delivery Worldwide Within 30 Minutes, or Your Next One is Free".

ps - sorry to be late to the party on this but the computer was Tango Uniform for a bit

Edited December 28, 2015 by Alan in Yorktown

[11bee]

EW used to be an area that the US dominated. Not any more. Not as kewl as hordes of F-22's but maybe just a critical?

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/21/russia-winning-the-electronic-war/?utm_content=bufferba439&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, commander of U.S. Army units in Europe, has described Russian EW capabilities in Ukraine as “eye-watering.” Ronald Pontius, deputy to Army Cyber Command’s chief, Lt. Gen. Edward Cardon, told a conference this month that “you can’t but come to the conclusion that we’re not making progress at the pace the threat demands.”

“They have companies, they have battalions, they have brigades that are dedicated to the electronic warfare mission, Those units are deploying “with specific electronic warfare equipment, with specific electronic warfare chains of command,” he said.

Currently, 813 soldiers make up the Army’s EW mission,

Pretty sure Russia is not the only potential adversary who takes this field seriously.

[TaiidanTomcat]

EW used to be an area that the US dominated. Not any more. Not as kewl as hordes of F-22's but maybe just a critical?

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/21/russia-winning-the-electronic-war/?utm_content=bufferba439&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, commander of U.S. Army units in Europe, has described Russian EW capabilities in Ukraine as “eye-watering.” Ronald Pontius, deputy to Army Cyber Command’s chief, Lt. Gen. Edward Cardon, told a conference this month that “you can’t but come to the conclusion that we’re not making progress at the pace the threat demands.”

“They have companies, they have battalions, they have brigades that are dedicated to the electronic warfare mission, Those units are deploying “with specific electronic warfare equipment, with specific electronic warfare chains of command,” he said.

Currently, 813 soldiers make up the Army’s EW mission,

Pretty sure Russia is not the only potential adversary who takes this field seriously.

You would think the army has been distracted the last 14 years or something

[11bee]

You would think the army has been distracted the last 14 years or something

It is what it is. Can't get overly focused on the next war when you are still bogged down with the present one(s). At least we've got 813 guys and gals who know a bit about EW. The only problem is that over the last 14 years, other nations have been looking very closely at the way we operate and have been spending a lot of time and money to offset the advantages that we currently enjoy.

As long as the next enemy doesn't have the ability to:

- Monitor our communication systems

- Jam our communication systems (including links to/from UAV's)

- Jam our GPS, which I've read we depend on quite a bit

- Precisely locate our own communication and jamming systems and,

- Call in rapid, accurate rocket and artillery strikes on these systems

Assuming the above holds true, I think we're still good to go.