Jump to content
tanknet.org

Burncycle360

Members
  • Content Count

    1,755
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Burncycle360

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

341 profile views
  1. My understanding is that Sea Ceptor gives you approximately "horizon reach" (~14-15 nm) with a favorable (approaching) target. It's a newer system, active radar with datalink so it won't need an illuminator like the older versions of ESSM, and benefits from a lighter VLS since they aren't using hot launch, simplifying integration in smaller, cheaper ships. It's faster and longer ranged than RAM, without the field of fire limitations, but presumably RAM, being a trainable launcher, would have a shorter minimum range and of course bolt-on integration with SeaRAM The latest versions of ES
  2. Sounds like the old school Sea control ship concept (ie, basically a Príncipe de Asturias). It would certainly bring a lot to the table tagging along with something that would otherwise simply be a surface action group, but one big issue with it is congress: they'll wonder why they're paying for supercarriers when you're rolling around with light carriers too, and really push for "well, let's find an optimal mix..." which is the death knell for a 12 CVN fleet. The Wasps, I think, get away with it because of how slow they are, and they're already quite busy with their primary jobs even though
  3. Our stewards have done very poorly when it comes to fiscal responsibility, perhaps an unintended consequence of the turnover rate of leadership incentivizing it, with short term benefits outweighing long term consequences. But eventually that bill comes due, and it seems that social security is little more than a Ponzi scheme. Taken in isolation, Peter Schiff believes that the Govt will sacrifice the dollar rather than do the difficult thing if it means short term assuagement, in a way resulting in a tragedy of the commons like downfall. Milton Friedman famously suggested eliminatin
  4. On at least one of the videos I've seen, the search radar on the SAM was on and spinning, but it didn't seem to react to the presence of the drone at all. What can be retrofitted to existing vehicles (anti aircraft or not) to mitigate the threat? It would need some reach because something close range will just cause them to shift from direct impact to standoff EFP. MMW search + tracking radar + directional jammer + some sort of hard kill system, all on a bolt-on RWS mount?
  5. Which sam systems fit into a 747 other than MANPADS? As far as I know this isn’t the cargo variant
  6. Missed Harpoon, so ended up buying C:MO. Initially I wasn't very happy that it didn't have many scenarios available, but the good news is the steam community workshop has plenty of community scenarios you can download for free that'll keep you busy for a while without having to pay for the addons. So far I like it. The scenario editor is nice if a bit tedious, there is no Ctrl+Z / undo if you accidentally mess something up. You can edit loadouts for ships (add phalanx, lasers, or whatever) but would like to have been able to edit loadout possibilities for hypothetical aircraft.
  7. I understand a significant risk for a conventional ICBM is that a nuclear power could mistake it for a nuclear armed weapon. A Falcon 9 class of rockets could loft 18-25 tons into LEO depending on reuse or fully expended, and when taking into account a suborbital trajectory, a MIRV bus and ablative heat protection for the projectiles you can expect anywhere from 12-20 warheads equivalent to 2,000 lbs JDAM or 50-80 SDB equivalent warheads. Upfront cost of the rocket is 50 million with around 15-20 million to turn it around if used in reusable config. A squadron of 12 in reusable conf
  8. The USN is a mess, the leadership can’t shake the cold war mindset of unlimited funding, revolutionary development and rolling in immature technology R&D into too big to fail programs. It’s so bad we can’t even build basic things anymore on time, on budget or for a competitive price. Intangibles like quality of crew and training are suffering behind the curtain, leadership is full of corruption and opulence, and turnover is too high since everyone wants to completely change the vision to leave a legacy, which doesn’t mesh with low rate production and other lethargic military indust
  9. It's a matter of shifting expectations and perspective, I suppose. If the UK wishes to remain a global power, it needs global reach and the ability to bring to the table a threat credible enough to use as leverage against peer opponents. This is not unreasonable given it's overseas commitments, commonwealth allies, and trade interests. IMO, a STOVL only QE with the F-35B's limited combat radius, limited support assets (AEW), and limited escorts is not that. It's grossly inadequate for peer threats for which this horse was ostensibly originally intended for, and overkill for non-peer th
  10. It's a foregone conclusion, for all intents and purposes. These things would just get sunk in port in a spoiling attack (Georgia 2.0) with whatever rationale Russia needs to come up with to justify it. I don't envy any FAC on the Black Sea in a shooting conflict. It's one of the few places the 42x RAM on the Braunschweig class seems reasonable... Russia will do as it pleases, the only way Ukraine could ensure persistence would be about 6-7 Type 214s with two continuously at sea, combined with well hidden land based AShM. That combination with something like Harpoon / Subharpoon would be
  11. I'm at a loss as to why they're investing in these, but maybe they don't have any alternative (since the UK is actually financing them). They certainly aren't going to last long in any conflict, and are overkill for EEZ enforcement.
×
×
  • Create New...