4 ms·

This is what’s disturbing about the way we contract these projects: we’re weaker because of cost-plus and an emphasis on expense over efficacy. Compare the tan

This is what’s disturbing about the way we contract these projects: we’re weaker because of cost-plus and an emphasis on expense over efficacy. Compare the tanks of WWII. American Shermans (at first) were something of a death-trap in terms of armor and carried weaker armaments. But you could churn them out quickly and teach someone with a high school degree how to do maintenance. Germans went the opposite: high-tech behemoths that were fast, heavily armored, and big-gunned. They were hell to fight, but they also couldn’t be produced or maintained at anything close to the speed of a Sherman. And as it turns out, modern war is not just about having the best toy but the one the market can produce and replace reliably. It seems to me that our extreme willingness for expense and new tech fetishism is putting us in the position of the Germans of last century—we’ll win all our short engagements but once we have to start replacing parts and vehicles, we’ll be hamstrung. EDIT: and so as not to seem like I’m repeating the myth, I’ll link here to a little debunking—the Sherman wasn’t a bad tank, just not a particularly cutting-edge one: http://knowledgeglue.com/dispelling-myths-surrounding-m4-sherman/ http://knowledgeglue.com/dispelling-myths-surrounding-m4-she...

walshemj 9y ago
There is a lot of vested interests in the Sherman Debate Should the USA have fitted the Hot 76.2 and more of the expensive ammo for D day Or should have they have gone for the Brit conversion using the 17pounder - towards the end Brit doctrine was 50/50 firefly / stock Sherman. Ok the 76.2 with the right ammo was good but they only had 2/3 rounds per tank of those as opposed to a British troop with 50% 17 pounders There are rumours of Infantry generals delaying the introduction of the 76.2 as allegedly one had an interest in the factory that made 75's - There is also the NIH aspect in refusing the funnies in American Beaches.
gaius 9y ago
And as it turns out, modern war is not just about having the best toy but the one the market can produce and replace reliably. We knew this once - hence the F16. But it has been forgotten, while there are F16s still flying!

walshemj 9y ago

There is a lot of vested interests in the Sherman Debate Should the USA have fitted the Hot 76.2 and more of the expensive ammo for D day Or should have they have gone for the Brit conversion using the 17pounder - towards the end Brit doctrine was 50/50 firefly / stock Sherman. Ok the 76.2 with the right ammo was good but they only had 2/3 rounds per tank of those as opposed to a British troop with 50% 17 pounders There are rumours of Infantry generals delaying the introduction of the 76.2 as allegedly one had an interest in the factory that made 75's - There is also the NIH aspect in refusing the funnies in American Beaches.

gaius 9y ago

And as it turns out, modern war is not just about having the best toy but the one the market can produce and replace reliably. We knew this once - hence the F16. But it has been forgotten, while there are F16s still flying!