4 ms·

U.S. watches nervously as Europe turns to South Korea for weapons

20 points by carabiner 4y ago

bell-cot 4y ago
> American defense officials and industry executives have long acknowledged that U.S.-made equipment — and the years-long supply chain guarantees that come along with contracts — is more expensive and takes take longer to arrive, but it remains superior in most cases to weaponry produced overseas. -Article "[...] you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time [...]" -(former) U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld Ah, for the Good Old Days - when the U.S. maintained a whole network of arsenals, armories, and other "ready reserve" capacity, so it could ~immediately produce serious quantities of (then) state-of-the-art weapons & ammunition in time of need. Whether or not the private businesses which dabbled in such manufacturer currently had any capacity for, or interested in, such activities.
Gravityloss 4y ago
Norway tested self propelled artillery in deep snow and the Korean solution won, so they bought that. Other countries followed. Anyway, many of these products have components from all over the world and can also be customized like use a different engine or gun barrel. Furthermore, one can cross-use them like fire rounds made elsewhere. The key is to design for common standards like gun calibre or missile size so allies and partners can share. May the best ones win.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
credit_guy 4y ago
Poland just seems to have gotten a very good deal. Maybe South Korea is just willing to sell at a loss with an eye towards future sales. According to wikipedia [1],[2], a K2 tank costs about $8.5 MM while a K9 self-propelled gun costs about $2.8 MM (with the mention that this is the price for the ROK military). At 980 tanks and 672 guns, that's a bit more than $10 BN. The additonal 48 FA-50 fighter planes would be worth about $1.5 BN more according to [3]. The article mentions a total price of $5.8 BN. But it could be as high as $15 BN, "if all the options are exercised in the coming years". It sounds to me that the $15 BN figure includes the price of spare parts, munitions, and other post-sale costs associated with military hardware purchases. If they did get indeed the said tanks, guns and fighter jets for $5.8 BN instead of $12 BN, then how can the US compete? Last year (2021) Poland announced [4] they will acquire 250 M1 Abrams tanks from the US. Now they are getting 4 times as many tanks, and a huge number of very respectable long range artillery pieces, and a few squadrons worth of fighter jets, for less money. This is mind blowing. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_Black_Panther https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_Black_Panther [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K9_Thunder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K9_Thunder [3] https://aerocorner.com/aircraft/kai-fa-50-fighting-eagle/ https://aerocorner.com/aircraft/kai-fa-50-fighting-eagle/ [4] https://www.army-technology.com/news/poland-250-m1-abrams-tanks-us/ https://www.army-technology.com/news/poland-250-m1-abrams-ta...
- bell-cot 4y ago
  > [...] then how can the US compete? Short answer: It can't. Longer answer: The U.S. defense industry is pretty much optimized for maximum short-term profit, by selling the-most-shiny-features equipment, at higher-is-better prices, to a domestic military establishment & government which are soaking in the rich gravy that the U.S. defense industry pours into Washington D.C. Do not expect them to compete with any competent, efficient defense company from a country that is a technological near-peer to the U.S.
- rasz 4y ago
  Not to mention US screwing Poland multiple times with never fulfilled offset obligations (https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/pdfs/1677-offsets-in-defense-trade-faqs-final/file https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/pdfs/1677-offset...). Im sure Lockheed congratulated themselves with Black Hawk deal which concluded with them taking over domestic manufacturer PZL Mielec and charging Poland premium for locally made parts, but this shit works only once.

20 points by carabiner 4y ago

> American defense officials and industry executives have long acknowledged that U.S.-made equipment — and the years-long supply chain guarantees that come along with contracts — is more expensive and takes take longer to arrive, but it remains superior in most cases to weaponry produced overseas. -Article "[...] you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time [...]" -(former) U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld Ah, for the Good Old Days - when the U.S. maintained a whole network of arsenals, armories, and other "ready reserve" capacity, so it could ~immediately produce serious quantities of (then) state-of-the-art weapons & ammunition in time of need. Whether or not the private businesses which dabbled in such manufacturer currently had any capacity for, or interested in, such activities.

Gravityloss 4y ago

Norway tested self propelled artillery in deep snow and the Korean solution won, so they bought that. Other countries followed. Anyway, many of these products have components from all over the world and can also be customized like use a different engine or gun barrel. Furthermore, one can cross-use them like fire rounds made elsewhere. The key is to design for common standards like gun calibre or missile size so allies and partners can share. May the best ones win.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

credit_guy 4y ago

Poland just seems to have gotten a very good deal. Maybe South Korea is just willing to sell at a loss with an eye towards future sales. According to wikipedia [1],[2], a K2 tank costs about $8.5 MM while a K9 self-propelled gun costs about $2.8 MM (with the mention that this is the price for the ROK military). At 980 tanks and 672 guns, that's a bit more than $10 BN. The additonal 48 FA-50 fighter planes would be worth about $1.5 BN more according to [3]. The article mentions a total price of $5.8 BN. But it could be as high as $15 BN, "if all the options are exercised in the coming years". It sounds to me that the $15 BN figure includes the price of spare parts, munitions, and other post-sale costs associated with military hardware purchases. If they did get indeed the said tanks, guns and fighter jets for $5.8 BN instead of $12 BN, then how can the US compete? Last year (2021) Poland announced [4] they will acquire 250 M1 Abrams tanks from the US. Now they are getting 4 times as many tanks, and a huge number of very respectable long range artillery pieces, and a few squadrons worth of fighter jets, for less money. This is mind blowing. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_Black_Panther https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_Black_Panther [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K9_Thunder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K9_Thunder [3] https://aerocorner.com/aircraft/kai-fa-50-fighting-eagle/ https://aerocorner.com/aircraft/kai-fa-50-fighting-eagle/ [4] https://www.army-technology.com/news/poland-250-m1-abrams-tanks-us/ https://www.army-technology.com/news/poland-250-m1-abrams-ta...

bell-cot 4y ago
> [...] then how can the US compete? Short answer: It can't. Longer answer: The U.S. defense industry is pretty much optimized for maximum short-term profit, by selling the-most-shiny-features equipment, at higher-is-better prices, to a domestic military establishment & government which are soaking in the rich gravy that the U.S. defense industry pours into Washington D.C. Do not expect them to compete with any competent, efficient defense company from a country that is a technological near-peer to the U.S.
rasz 4y ago
Not to mention US screwing Poland multiple times with never fulfilled offset obligations (https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/pdfs/1677-offsets-in-defense-trade-faqs-final/file https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/pdfs/1677-offset...). Im sure Lockheed congratulated themselves with Black Hawk deal which concluded with them taking over domestic manufacturer PZL Mielec and charging Poland premium for locally made parts, but this shit works only once.