6 ms·

Are you referring to ATACMS, Hi-Mars, M777's and M1 Abrams, the backbone of the US military and many of its allies? The materiel currently used all over the wo

Are you referring to ATACMS, Hi-Mars, M777's and M1 Abrams, the backbone of the US military and many of its allies? The materiel currently used all over the world? That 'obsolete' heavy weaponry?[0] Or is it the thousands of Javelins that annihilated the Russian tank columns so that the Russians are currently mounting assaults in Chinese golf carts?[1] [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62002218 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62002218 [1] https://www.kyivpost.com/post/43685 https://www.kyivpost.com/post/43685

actionfromafar 2y ago
Yes! ATACMS is legacy. There were only a few M1s given. MANY more M1s were used against the Iraqi Army! The stream of weapons has been more of a trickle of weapons. The Javelins have good PR with the nice Saint Javelin but the British-Swedish N-LAWs are wicked and the tens of thousands of the Bofors AT4 did a lot of the initial grunt work.
- chris_wot 2y ago
  Not to mention that maintaining M1s must be a nightmare. The Ukrainians seem to prefer the Bushmasters. This kind of makes sense, given it seems a lot of what Ukraine is doing is guerrilla warfare then equipment that is easily serviceable likely is more useful.
- onlypassingthru 2y ago
  ATACMS... The ones Biden reluctantly donated after Ukraine begged for them because they can strike deeper behind the frontlines and inside Russian territory? They may be an older platform but they appear to be highly desirable and still brought out for juicy targets. It was 31 M1s donated, last time I looked. And they survived a helluva lot longer against the droneless Iraqi Army, which helps explain the low number. A $500 drone can ignite a $5M tank. Drones have changed the calculus of tank warfare. Maybe the AT4 and NLAW didn't have the same effectiveness of Javelin? The Javelin has had a pretty good PR campaign with it's point and destroy videos.
  - trhway 2y ago
    >A $500 drone can ignite a $5M tank. Drones have changed the calculus of tank warfare. No. What you see in Ukraine is the 20th century war with some drones. Active defense system can take out RPG and anti-tank missile. It can easily take out a much slower moving drone. Unfortunately, the Western tanks and IFVs came to Ukraine without ADS (and many even without reactive armor). And for whatever reason Ukraine was pretty slow to put passive drone defenses onto the armor - you can see on the videos of the Ukrainian 2023 counter-offensive that the Western tanks and IVF are mostly "naked", just the bare base armor. There are stories - videos - from recent decade how tanks correctly "dressed up" with passive defenses and reactive armor would survive direct hits from Javelin, RPG, etc., in some cases it would even survive multiple hits from RPG. And active defense system is a huge step up even from that. If anything, with the next generation of active defense systems being able to shoot down even incoming artillery/tank gun round, the tanks will continue to rule the battlefield, especially in autonomous version.
    - onlypassingthru 2y ago
      If you've been watching the war you'll notice that tanks are largely absent from battle these days. Russia had thousands more tanks than Ukraine 3 years ago, and now is scrounging the last of its inventory leftover from WWII. The Super Tank™ you've described sounds cool, though. Can Ukraine order 1000 of the upgraded version with lasers for Spring delivery?
      - trhway 2y ago
        >Russia had thousands more tanks watch the videos from the war - the tanks are mostly without ADS, and the ADS that Russia has is really a crappy one. You can also watch videos how soldiers shoot down the drones with shotgun or just using some stick/stone. Drones are much easier to shoot down than RPG, and nobody has been able to shoot down RPG with shotgun (a great baseball player probably would be able with some non-zero probability to bat an RPG out though). >Can Ukraine order 1000 of the upgraded version with lasers for Spring delivery? No. Even the existing ADS with shrapnel warheads are not sold to Ukraine.
- dmix 2y ago
  There is no proper replacement for ATACMS yet. At the projected rate of production for the new replacement missile, a years worth would last about a couple weeks of usage in a serious conflict. ATACMS are still 100% valuable to the US. > A total of 110 PrSMs are expected to be procured in fiscal 2024 and 190 in fiscal 2025, Inside Defense wrote, citing the Department of Defense documents. https://thedefensepost.com/2024/03/07/lockheed-precision-strike-missile/ https://thedefensepost.com/2024/03/07/lockheed-precision-str...
- themgt 2y ago
  What did we replace "legacy" ATACMS with we could use in a war today? PrSM? In November 2023, the Army delivered the first four Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM) as an early operational capability (EOC). The Army shot two PrSM EOC missiles at a maritime target in June 2024. Between November 2023 and August 2024, the Army executed three production qualification test (PQT) events. The Army intends to complete a limited user test (LUT) with the fifth PQT test event in 1QFY25 and the remaining four planned PQT test events by 3QFY25. https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2024/army/2024prsm.pdf https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2024/army/...
relaxing 2y ago
Yeah man all that stuff was built in the 80s to counter the Soviet threat. We have better stuff now.
_DeadFred_ 2y ago
"How dare you refer to our weapons designed to fight in eastern europe against Russia. We need those weapons in the USA in case we have to.. fight... in eastern europe... against... russia?"
- slt2021 2y ago
  US never wanted to fight Russia directly as it would mean nuclear escalation. US needs somewhat strong Russia as a scarecrow for Europe and everyone else in the world, so that people would join NATO and pay 4% of GDP to the American military industrial complex: Lockheed Raytheon and friends. The goal is to scare people and force them to shell out dough for overpriced US weapons. If Russia becomes too weak, there are two risks: 1. Nuclear/Biowarfare proliferation due to instability inside RU 2. Europe won't spend a dime procuring US weapons because Russia would not be a threat anymore 3. China can increase influence in Russia so American goal is to keep somewhat stable Russia and force EU to shell dough on US weapons. Thats the racket, everything else is a distraction
  - 7952 2y ago
    What about china as a weapons exporter?
  - ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
    >pay 4% of GDP to the American military industrial complex The target is 2%, most of NATO doesn't hit it, and there's plenty of European arms manufacturers.
victorbjorklund 2y ago
They didnt send their newst javelins. They send their oldest.
- onlypassingthru 2y ago
  A man-portable, fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile system before its expiration date is still a man-portable, fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile system.
  - account42 2y ago
    It is however not worth as much to the US than a man-portable, fire-and-forge anti-tank guided missile system that they won't have to replace for much longer.
NoFingerprints 2y ago
The west made these weapons to counter Russian tanks. Every Javelin fired by a Ukrainian takes out one more tank that we don't have to worry about.
etc-hosts 2y ago
The US clearly donates obsolete weapons to Ukraine, and then ships the snazzy new super deadly stuff to Israel.
- brohackster 2y ago
  [flagged]
rasz 2y ago
Yes, expired ammunition and equipment waiting to be recycled. Bradleys waiting for scrapping at Red River Army Depot, Texas expired ATACMS https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/10/05/m39a1-atacms-for-ukraine-are-officially-expired-but-still-usable/ https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/10/05/m39a1-atacms-for-uk... 3 million DPICM waiting for expensive disposal

actionfromafar 2y ago

Yes! ATACMS is legacy. There were only a few M1s given. MANY more M1s were used against the Iraqi Army! The stream of weapons has been more of a trickle of weapons. The Javelins have good PR with the nice Saint Javelin but the British-Swedish N-LAWs are wicked and the tens of thousands of the Bofors AT4 did a lot of the initial grunt work.

chris_wot 2y ago
Not to mention that maintaining M1s must be a nightmare. The Ukrainians seem to prefer the Bushmasters. This kind of makes sense, given it seems a lot of what Ukraine is doing is guerrilla warfare then equipment that is easily serviceable likely is more useful.
onlypassingthru 2y ago
ATACMS... The ones Biden reluctantly donated after Ukraine begged for them because they can strike deeper behind the frontlines and inside Russian territory? They may be an older platform but they appear to be highly desirable and still brought out for juicy targets. It was 31 M1s donated, last time I looked. And they survived a helluva lot longer against the droneless Iraqi Army, which helps explain the low number. A $500 drone can ignite a $5M tank. Drones have changed the calculus of tank warfare. Maybe the AT4 and NLAW didn't have the same effectiveness of Javelin? The Javelin has had a pretty good PR campaign with it's point and destroy videos.
- trhway 2y ago
  >A $500 drone can ignite a $5M tank. Drones have changed the calculus of tank warfare. No. What you see in Ukraine is the 20th century war with some drones. Active defense system can take out RPG and anti-tank missile. It can easily take out a much slower moving drone. Unfortunately, the Western tanks and IFVs came to Ukraine without ADS (and many even without reactive armor). And for whatever reason Ukraine was pretty slow to put passive drone defenses onto the armor - you can see on the videos of the Ukrainian 2023 counter-offensive that the Western tanks and IVF are mostly "naked", just the bare base armor. There are stories - videos - from recent decade how tanks correctly "dressed up" with passive defenses and reactive armor would survive direct hits from Javelin, RPG, etc., in some cases it would even survive multiple hits from RPG. And active defense system is a huge step up even from that. If anything, with the next generation of active defense systems being able to shoot down even incoming artillery/tank gun round, the tanks will continue to rule the battlefield, especially in autonomous version.
  - onlypassingthru 2y ago
    If you've been watching the war you'll notice that tanks are largely absent from battle these days. Russia had thousands more tanks than Ukraine 3 years ago, and now is scrounging the last of its inventory leftover from WWII. The Super Tank™ you've described sounds cool, though. Can Ukraine order 1000 of the upgraded version with lasers for Spring delivery?
    - trhway 2y ago
      >Russia had thousands more tanks watch the videos from the war - the tanks are mostly without ADS, and the ADS that Russia has is really a crappy one. You can also watch videos how soldiers shoot down the drones with shotgun or just using some stick/stone. Drones are much easier to shoot down than RPG, and nobody has been able to shoot down RPG with shotgun (a great baseball player probably would be able with some non-zero probability to bat an RPG out though). >Can Ukraine order 1000 of the upgraded version with lasers for Spring delivery? No. Even the existing ADS with shrapnel warheads are not sold to Ukraine.
dmix 2y ago
There is no proper replacement for ATACMS yet. At the projected rate of production for the new replacement missile, a years worth would last about a couple weeks of usage in a serious conflict. ATACMS are still 100% valuable to the US. > A total of 110 PrSMs are expected to be procured in fiscal 2024 and 190 in fiscal 2025, Inside Defense wrote, citing the Department of Defense documents. https://thedefensepost.com/2024/03/07/lockheed-precision-strike-missile/ https://thedefensepost.com/2024/03/07/lockheed-precision-str...
themgt 2y ago
What did we replace "legacy" ATACMS with we could use in a war today? PrSM? In November 2023, the Army delivered the first four Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM) as an early operational capability (EOC). The Army shot two PrSM EOC missiles at a maritime target in June 2024. Between November 2023 and August 2024, the Army executed three production qualification test (PQT) events. The Army intends to complete a limited user test (LUT) with the fifth PQT test event in 1QFY25 and the remaining four planned PQT test events by 3QFY25. https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2024/army/2024prsm.pdf https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2024/army/...

relaxing 2y ago

Yeah man all that stuff was built in the 80s to counter the Soviet threat. We have better stuff now.

_DeadFred_ 2y ago

"How dare you refer to our weapons designed to fight in eastern europe against Russia. We need those weapons in the USA in case we have to.. fight... in eastern europe... against... russia?"

slt2021 2y ago
US never wanted to fight Russia directly as it would mean nuclear escalation. US needs somewhat strong Russia as a scarecrow for Europe and everyone else in the world, so that people would join NATO and pay 4% of GDP to the American military industrial complex: Lockheed Raytheon and friends. The goal is to scare people and force them to shell out dough for overpriced US weapons. If Russia becomes too weak, there are two risks: 1. Nuclear/Biowarfare proliferation due to instability inside RU 2. Europe won't spend a dime procuring US weapons because Russia would not be a threat anymore 3. China can increase influence in Russia so American goal is to keep somewhat stable Russia and force EU to shell dough on US weapons. Thats the racket, everything else is a distraction
- 7952 2y ago
  What about china as a weapons exporter?
- ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
  >pay 4% of GDP to the American military industrial complex The target is 2%, most of NATO doesn't hit it, and there's plenty of European arms manufacturers.

victorbjorklund 2y ago

They didnt send their newst javelins. They send their oldest.

onlypassingthru 2y ago
A man-portable, fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile system before its expiration date is still a man-portable, fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile system.
- account42 2y ago
  It is however not worth as much to the US than a man-portable, fire-and-forge anti-tank guided missile system that they won't have to replace for much longer.

NoFingerprints 2y ago

The west made these weapons to counter Russian tanks. Every Javelin fired by a Ukrainian takes out one more tank that we don't have to worry about.

etc-hosts 2y ago

The US clearly donates obsolete weapons to Ukraine, and then ships the snazzy new super deadly stuff to Israel.

brohackster 2y ago
[flagged]

rasz 2y ago

Yes, expired ammunition and equipment waiting to be recycled. Bradleys waiting for scrapping at Red River Army Depot, Texas expired ATACMS https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/10/05/m39a1-atacms-for-ukraine-are-officially-expired-but-still-usable/ https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/10/05/m39a1-atacms-for-uk... 3 million DPICM waiting for expensive disposal