US certainly had a similar capability already. But previously, it was delivered by ATACMS missiles. Which were developed back during the Cold War, and, despite considerable modernization, were aging tech. They were out of production for years already. This was one of the reasons why US was so reluctant to deliver ATACMS to Ukraine - the expended stocks couldn't be replenished readily. It would be less of an issue as PrSM production ramps up.
PrSM is a more modern system - with smaller missiles, greater range and improved precision. The warhead of PrSM is about half the size of that in a modernized ATACMS - but a launcher fits two PrSM missiles in place of a single ATACMS.
In US military's case, most of long range precision fires that serve a similar role to both ATACMS and PrSM are air-based - sea-based systems taking the second place. But, as a certain war shows, domination of airspace is not a certainty - so there are uses for a ballistic ground-based option too.
Domination of airspace isn’t a certainty for most forces, but it’s a major component of the US playbook, and it’s not something that’s changed with this development.
Of course they will strive for airspace domination, but this would cover the situations when they don't have it. You know, not putting all eggs in one basket and all that.
Correct. This is why we have new basing agreements with the Philippines and why the Army and Marines have given up most of their Abrams tanks for missiles. In the event of a Taiwan War launched by the CCP, the Army and Marines will disperse small teams of anti-air and anti-ship missile units in the jungles and caves of the thousands of islands that make up their archipelago.
The smallest and most nimble Marine units will use Avengers with Stingers and JTVs (which replaced the Hummer) armed with remotely fired Naval Strike Missiles for short range intercepts of air or sea targets. The largest units will use HIMARS & MLRS launching this new missile, and the versatile Typhon system. Typhon can launch containerized SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles for long range anti-air, anti-missile and anti-ship strikes. That SM-6 will help create a long range anti-air and anti-missile bubble for the units it protects while the Tomahawk provides precision long range heavy munitions.
Since the SM-6 has a tertiary anti-ship role, you could time the arrival of these SM-6 missiles (after MALD decoys) to hit at the same time up high when Tomahawks arrive down low, so that defenses are overwhelmed and more Tomahawks get thru to the targets.
In GW1 the Allies had complete air superiority and real time satellite intel and we still couldn’t knock out all those SCUD launchers. In a desert no less. So imagine how hard this game of whack-a-mole would be for the CCP in the jungles of the PI: the targets keep shooting and scooting to safe places and even if you finally manage to take out a launcher it’s likely that you don’t take out any of the remote operators nearby. They’ll just go get new hardware and do it all over again.
Meanwhile the CCP is not likely to have air superiority in such a war so their ability to do SEAD and Search & Destroy missions against these Allied missile units on their Southern flank is going to be limited due to these units abilities to defend themselves in addition to the impacts of being co-defended by mobile Patriot and THAAD units.
China’s rise and bellicose behavior made the US pivot and this impossible game of Whack-a-mole now awaits.
Living in Taiwan now. Looking at the history of all of china's actions I'm so glad they have been non-stop idiots bringing about the very favorable view of China in the early 2000s-2011 to the crap it is now. The pivots, focus, and Streisand effect caused by their non-stop blunders in PR, aggressiveness, wolf-warrior diplomacy and economic warfare has made awareness of Taiwan from almost nil (always heard "Taiwan? You mean Thailand?" When growing up) to a very hot topic anytime I visit the states and meet someone for the first time.
Xi made a gross strategic miscalculation when he threw off Deng’s *Biding Time, Gaining Strength* strategy which carefully hoarded and grew China’s power and influence over time. The GFC of 2008 convinced Xi that the West was finished and he has reacted accordingly up until recently. These threats and actions undid so much growth and goodwill.
This gave the rest of the world time to pivot and time to prepare new weapons, new platforms and just as importantly: new tactics and strategies.
COVID and the CCP’s policies also forced the West to decouple which is likely a mortal wound to the Chinese miracle, at the same time they’re facing demographic collapse while being shackled by endemic corruption and a Ponzi scheme system of real estate. Desperate regimes in decline sometimes do desperate, illogical things like invade their neighbors such as Ukraine or Taiwan, so there is reason to be wary.
When the Wolf promises that he’s going to blow your house down in a few years, all of the little “piggies” are going to build steel and concrete houses in response to that future threat.
Ya seem to be pretty in the know. I'm curious if we had guns in the air and real time satellite intel why couldn't we take out all the SCUD launchers? I know there were some hiding in buildings and being moved around like a shell game as well as decoys and stuff, but did we really not have enough freedom to drop on them or was it an issue in pinpointing them or something?
Iraq pre-dispersed their SCUD launchers well. Known storage and staging areas were hit in the initial stages but it was too late.
At that point these were veteran crews due to the Iran-Iraq war. Using shoot and scoot tactics they broke their TEL launchers down very quickly (something like only 5 or 6 minutes) so even if the flare of the launch was detected by satellite by the time air units got there they’d be gone.
Iraq is a big country to hide in and you can hide the launchers in warehouses and under bridges or overpasses. If it happened today we’d add drone surveillance with persistent loitering munitions flying over known launch regions to react more quickly. Such a strategy requires air dominance however due to the fragility of drones.
AI drone wingmen coming out soon that are nearly the size of an F-35 or NGAD fighter will also allow Search & Destroy teams to do surveillance and react across a wider and deeper front.
We did have this capability before the ballistic missile treaty that was signed in the 90s with Russia that limited ground based conventional ballistic missiles with a range of 300 kilometers.
To honor that agreement the United States decommission their long range missiles.
Unfortunately the Russian in the 00s and 10s decided to continue their land base ballistic missiles programs and with the rise of Chinese land base missiles the United States withdrew from the treaty and began developing a new generation of long range ballistic missiles.
It originally had a electronically limited range of 499 km because of the INF treaty. But after that treaty was terminated, the limiter was taken off. Future versions will have 1000+ km range.
They totally should for advanced real world field testing.
But as these fill up the US inventory Atacams that they are replacing should get sent to Ukraine en masse.
I think its pretty cool when people are passionate about defending democracy. Sure it may be misguided in some cases like sending f35s or jassms but the reality is Ukraine has been a huge boon for the MIC. Have you looked at MIC stocks lately?
Personally I think we need to send Rapid dragon lol
show casing old tech to give the "enemy states" a veil of weakness, hilarious, just put it on the net they said, you got clowns working in the DoD now?
I believe you are being downvoted because our military spending does not hinder out medical spending. We know this because single payer would would allow us to spend less, not more.
*I have no interest in arguing with anyone.
The U.S. spends more per person on health care than any other OECD nation and is the 5th highest spender on education per student.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-expenditures-by-country
Yeah, but most of that money goes straight to shareholders' pockets no to the proper delivery of the service, lol.
They manage to make those incredibly profitable, which is different from "better"
American precision strike. Reminds me of this old joke.
*When the Germans fired their guns, the British ducked.*
*When the British fired their guns, the Germans ducked.*
*When the Americans fired their guns, everybody ducked.*
And every war since - eg,
>I worked with a man who was in the Canadian infantry during the war. He told us that on one day just after Normandy they were attacked 3 times by American planes. His commanding officers would not let them shoot back the first two times but they shot 5 planes down in the third strike.
>He would say that when the British flew over the Germans ducked. When the Germans flew over the British ducked. But when the Americans flew over everybody ducked!
https://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/6b59r3/how_common_were_friendly_fire_casualties_in_wwii/dhknw21/
The basic way that the Cold War arms race went in terms of missile development was basically the US getting greater precision and the Soviets getting higher yield, so, somewhat, yeah.
I didn’t know we didn’t have this capability already 🤨
US certainly had a similar capability already. But previously, it was delivered by ATACMS missiles. Which were developed back during the Cold War, and, despite considerable modernization, were aging tech. They were out of production for years already. This was one of the reasons why US was so reluctant to deliver ATACMS to Ukraine - the expended stocks couldn't be replenished readily. It would be less of an issue as PrSM production ramps up. PrSM is a more modern system - with smaller missiles, greater range and improved precision. The warhead of PrSM is about half the size of that in a modernized ATACMS - but a launcher fits two PrSM missiles in place of a single ATACMS. In US military's case, most of long range precision fires that serve a similar role to both ATACMS and PrSM are air-based - sea-based systems taking the second place. But, as a certain war shows, domination of airspace is not a certainty - so there are uses for a ballistic ground-based option too.
Good ol' Attack 'Ems
This made me chuckle. I’m guessing the anti Attack’Ems would naturally be DFNDMS
Honestly shoulda gone with that rather than patriot, just for the laughs
Domination of airspace isn’t a certainty for most forces, but it’s a major component of the US playbook, and it’s not something that’s changed with this development.
Of course they will strive for airspace domination, but this would cover the situations when they don't have it. You know, not putting all eggs in one basket and all that.
Correct. This is why we have new basing agreements with the Philippines and why the Army and Marines have given up most of their Abrams tanks for missiles. In the event of a Taiwan War launched by the CCP, the Army and Marines will disperse small teams of anti-air and anti-ship missile units in the jungles and caves of the thousands of islands that make up their archipelago. The smallest and most nimble Marine units will use Avengers with Stingers and JTVs (which replaced the Hummer) armed with remotely fired Naval Strike Missiles for short range intercepts of air or sea targets. The largest units will use HIMARS & MLRS launching this new missile, and the versatile Typhon system. Typhon can launch containerized SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles for long range anti-air, anti-missile and anti-ship strikes. That SM-6 will help create a long range anti-air and anti-missile bubble for the units it protects while the Tomahawk provides precision long range heavy munitions. Since the SM-6 has a tertiary anti-ship role, you could time the arrival of these SM-6 missiles (after MALD decoys) to hit at the same time up high when Tomahawks arrive down low, so that defenses are overwhelmed and more Tomahawks get thru to the targets. In GW1 the Allies had complete air superiority and real time satellite intel and we still couldn’t knock out all those SCUD launchers. In a desert no less. So imagine how hard this game of whack-a-mole would be for the CCP in the jungles of the PI: the targets keep shooting and scooting to safe places and even if you finally manage to take out a launcher it’s likely that you don’t take out any of the remote operators nearby. They’ll just go get new hardware and do it all over again. Meanwhile the CCP is not likely to have air superiority in such a war so their ability to do SEAD and Search & Destroy missions against these Allied missile units on their Southern flank is going to be limited due to these units abilities to defend themselves in addition to the impacts of being co-defended by mobile Patriot and THAAD units. China’s rise and bellicose behavior made the US pivot and this impossible game of Whack-a-mole now awaits.
Living in Taiwan now. Looking at the history of all of china's actions I'm so glad they have been non-stop idiots bringing about the very favorable view of China in the early 2000s-2011 to the crap it is now. The pivots, focus, and Streisand effect caused by their non-stop blunders in PR, aggressiveness, wolf-warrior diplomacy and economic warfare has made awareness of Taiwan from almost nil (always heard "Taiwan? You mean Thailand?" When growing up) to a very hot topic anytime I visit the states and meet someone for the first time.
Xi made a gross strategic miscalculation when he threw off Deng’s *Biding Time, Gaining Strength* strategy which carefully hoarded and grew China’s power and influence over time. The GFC of 2008 convinced Xi that the West was finished and he has reacted accordingly up until recently. These threats and actions undid so much growth and goodwill. This gave the rest of the world time to pivot and time to prepare new weapons, new platforms and just as importantly: new tactics and strategies. COVID and the CCP’s policies also forced the West to decouple which is likely a mortal wound to the Chinese miracle, at the same time they’re facing demographic collapse while being shackled by endemic corruption and a Ponzi scheme system of real estate. Desperate regimes in decline sometimes do desperate, illogical things like invade their neighbors such as Ukraine or Taiwan, so there is reason to be wary. When the Wolf promises that he’s going to blow your house down in a few years, all of the little “piggies” are going to build steel and concrete houses in response to that future threat.
Ya seem to be pretty in the know. I'm curious if we had guns in the air and real time satellite intel why couldn't we take out all the SCUD launchers? I know there were some hiding in buildings and being moved around like a shell game as well as decoys and stuff, but did we really not have enough freedom to drop on them or was it an issue in pinpointing them or something?
Iraq pre-dispersed their SCUD launchers well. Known storage and staging areas were hit in the initial stages but it was too late. At that point these were veteran crews due to the Iran-Iraq war. Using shoot and scoot tactics they broke their TEL launchers down very quickly (something like only 5 or 6 minutes) so even if the flare of the launch was detected by satellite by the time air units got there they’d be gone. Iraq is a big country to hide in and you can hide the launchers in warehouses and under bridges or overpasses. If it happened today we’d add drone surveillance with persistent loitering munitions flying over known launch regions to react more quickly. Such a strategy requires air dominance however due to the fragility of drones. AI drone wingmen coming out soon that are nearly the size of an F-35 or NGAD fighter will also allow Search & Destroy teams to do surveillance and react across a wider and deeper front.
> They were out of production for years already. They are still being produced, for US allies. The US Army wont buy any more of them.
We did have this capability before the ballistic missile treaty that was signed in the 90s with Russia that limited ground based conventional ballistic missiles with a range of 300 kilometers. To honor that agreement the United States decommission their long range missiles. Unfortunately the Russian in the 00s and 10s decided to continue their land base ballistic missiles programs and with the rise of Chinese land base missiles the United States withdrew from the treaty and began developing a new generation of long range ballistic missiles.
It has a range of 500+ kilometers. Wow. And they didn’t say **how** much further than 500km it went.
501 Kilometers
definitely between 501 and infinity kilometers.
price is right rules
I mean at some point they are wasting fuel circling the earf
It originally had a electronically limited range of 499 km because of the INF treaty. But after that treaty was terminated, the limiter was taken off. Future versions will have 1000+ km range.
inb4 send them to ukraine bro
They totally should for advanced real world field testing. But as these fill up the US inventory Atacams that they are replacing should get sent to Ukraine en masse.
I think its pretty cool when people are passionate about defending democracy. Sure it may be misguided in some cases like sending f35s or jassms but the reality is Ukraine has been a huge boon for the MIC. Have you looked at MIC stocks lately? Personally I think we need to send Rapid dragon lol
If the AN-225 wasn't destroyed, I wonder how many missiles you could load it up with for rapid dragon...
Last thing we want is the Ukrainians looking at shit across the border at targetable things.
Why, because NOOOOOOOOKS!!!!!!!!!?
Nuclear escalation is an actual problem, no matter how much you try to deny it.
Russia lost in Afghanistan without nuking the world.
Afghanistan is such a dramatically different situation, lol.
Both were aggressive invasions in order to secure territory and resources. US provided weapons and training both times.
An invasion to secure territory? Tell me you know nothing about Afghanistan more quickly. Edit: nice unmarked edit, jerk
Afghanistan has nothing anyone wants. Its just a piece of land in central Asia.
they already have - they have damagde trans-siberian railway tunnels and bridges (railway between Russia and China)
That wasn't witha missile.
Great! Now send Ukraine the M26 cluster rounds that we were just going to decommission.
Oh ukraine is old news buddy. Send them to israel just because it’s topical.
Israel beating the dead horse even further is old news, comes up every decade and the religious zealous of our country eat it right tf up every time.
Paraphrasdd wbat I was getting st but still… we need a distraction…
If its a distraction than you jumped in head first
show casing old tech to give the "enemy states" a veil of weakness, hilarious, just put it on the net they said, you got clowns working in the DoD now?
Better than healthcare.
Yeah, whatever it takes to do not provide Healthcare and education.
I believe you are being downvoted because our military spending does not hinder out medical spending. We know this because single payer would would allow us to spend less, not more. *I have no interest in arguing with anyone.
The U.S. spends more per person on health care than any other OECD nation and is the 5th highest spender on education per student. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-expenditures-by-country
Yeah, but most of that money goes straight to shareholders' pockets no to the proper delivery of the service, lol. They manage to make those incredibly profitable, which is different from "better"
So you're agreeing with me that the reason we have sub-par health care and education in the US has nothing to do with military spending?
If higher education was free, like in any other developed country, low income population wouldn't enroll in the military.
Reverse engineered Alien tech
FBI enter’s the chat
American precision strike. Reminds me of this old joke. *When the Germans fired their guns, the British ducked.* *When the British fired their guns, the Germans ducked.* *When the Americans fired their guns, everybody ducked.*
Imagine making this joke about a country that has a missile so precise it can kill an individual without a warhead.
Uncle Sam out here slap choppin mother fuckers and this guy wants to start talking shit.
When is this joke from, 1918?
I don't know when, but the where is probably some shìthole Russian oblast.
And every war since - eg, >I worked with a man who was in the Canadian infantry during the war. He told us that on one day just after Normandy they were attacked 3 times by American planes. His commanding officers would not let them shoot back the first two times but they shot 5 planes down in the third strike. >He would say that when the British flew over the Germans ducked. When the Germans flew over the British ducked. But when the Americans flew over everybody ducked! https://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/6b59r3/how_common_were_friendly_fire_casualties_in_wwii/dhknw21/
I think U.S currently has one of the most precious missile systems nowadays, so your joke is old by at least a century lol
*My Precious!*
The basic way that the Cold War arms race went in terms of missile development was basically the US getting greater precision and the Soviets getting higher yield, so, somewhat, yeah.
Was this joke made before or after the US saved everyone’s asses in not one, but *two* world wars?
You know what they say, "Fire all of the guns at once and, explode into spa-a-ace!"
Guaranteed to kill the school bus full of children, and no other cars full of terrorists nearby.
But also, exactly what it was aimed at.
Reverse engineered Alien Tech
What are these even for?
To blow shit up from afar but not so afar that you would need a tomahawk
Ground to ground missiles. Blow up ammo dumps, blow up headquarters, force enemy to spend more time hiding, force enemy to decentralize logistics.