User Panel
Quoted:
That is because they get the job done. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
|
Quoted: 500lb warhead and 100 mile range would ruin another nations day https://nationalinterest.org/sites/default/files/styles/desktop__1486_x_614/public/main_images/mizokami_nsm.jpg?itok=n18uz2vV View Quote Failed To Load Title No need to create a new unit, new troop requirements that take away from Infantry, etc - though a new kill chain will have to be added. Or, I always liked the Ground launched SDB that BAE (or was it Boeing?) and SAAB tried out (SDB on the front of a MRLS rocket). |
|
Quoted:
5mi (8km) isn't enough for shore to ship attacks? how are Marines going to do the over the horizon targeting needed for a longer range anti-ship missile? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
Quoted:
5mi (8km) isn't enough for shore to ship attacks? how are Marines going to do the over the horizon targeting needed for a longer range anti-ship missile? View Quote Put your sensor on a 20m tower. You just added a whole lot of range (out to 10 miles off the top of my head) to detect a sea level target. Ships are taller than sea level (until you put a bunch of holes in them) |
|
|
|
Those are bad ass missiles/UCAVs.
|
|
|
Quoted:
5mi (8km) isn't enough for shore to ship attacks? how are Marines going to do the over the horizon targeting needed for a longer range anti-ship missile? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: Lol. So much range Think of it like a Rivet Joint/JSTARS/AWACS/Aegis/Hawkeye/FA-18/Growler all rolled up in a sneaky STOVL airframe that can fly off mini carriers and short fields. Bit of a game changer and in need of more ordnance to guide. |
|
It seems very logical as we could park them on islands across the Pacific and have a perpetual capability that isn't dependent on a ship staying afloat, fueled, and so on.
There are a lot of very capable anti-ship weapons that the US doesn't seem to have a version of...especially in the area of land based missiles. It seems relatively low cost, easy to maintain, can't sink... If it had the range and was fast enough/hard to detect...it seems like there's no downside? |
|
Quoted: But the Marines had air power then just like they do now. Why do they need these missiles when they have super awesome stealthy F-35 and sattelites? Their whole reason for buying the F-35B was for all of these expeditionary fantasyland scenarios View Quote |
|
|
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: Have you met the F-35B? Think of it like a Rivet Joint/JSTARS/AWACS/Aegis/Hawkeye/FA-18/Growler all rolled up in a sneaky STOVL airframe that can fly off mini carriers and short fields. Bit of a game changer and in need of more ordnance to guide. |
|
Quoted:
Please buy! https://i.imgur.com/QdLumIv.jpg https://www.naval-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/07/1l-image-RBS15-Gungnir.jpg View Quote CIC, communications, 2-4 launcher vehicles and missiles to boot? 50 million? 100 million? |
|
Why Marines? Who else are you going to dump on a fucked up little island in the middle of no where with little or no support or infrastructure and loving every minute of it? The Air Force?
|
|
Quoted:
The country that has thousands of spies in America may want to take a shot at some point and we need a counter View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
No one's acting like that works on short to medium range ballistic missiles.
|
|
Quoted:
No one's acting like that works on short to medium range ballistic missiles. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
No one's acting like that works on short to medium range ballistic missiles. Does a ballistic missile based in western China travel exoatmosphetically at any point? Why does China care so much about THAAD deployments? Why did Russia announce 5 new weapons systems that have only space based interceptors as a common denominator? Is Russia’s Poseidon a greater threat to the US or China? And speaking of asking for effects, what happens when a technologically inferior enemy intentionally Kesslers the world? What system or systems can create the best replacement for our previously orbital C4I? |
|
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: Have you met the F-35B? Think of it like a Rivet Joint/JSTARS/AWACS/Aegis/Hawkeye/FA-18/Growler all rolled up in a sneaky STOVL airframe that can fly off mini carriers and short fields. Bit of a game changer and in need of more ordnance to guide. Now that the Marines have such a sensor it is not much of a surprise they want a missile for it to guide. |
|
Quoted: If the ChiComs had a stealthy senor node they could use to find, track, and provide missile guidance to our carriers over the horizon the DF 21/26 would be exponentially more dangerous. Now that the Marines have such a sensor it is not much of a surprise they want a missile for it to guide. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
That is because they get the job done. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Quoted: If the ChiComs had a stealthy senor node they could use to find, track, and provide missile guidance to our carriers over the horizon the DF 21/26 would be exponentially more dangerous. Now that the Marines have such a sensor it is not much of a surprise they want a missile for it to guide. |
|
Quoted:
Okay, there is a thought. What is the unit cost for a shore battery? Radar vehicle, CIC, communications, 2-4 launcher vehicles and missiles to boot? 50 million? 100 million? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Okay, there is a thought. What is the unit cost for a shore battery? Radar vehicle,
CIC, communications, 2-4 launcher vehicles and missiles to boot? 50 million? 100 million? |
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted: If the ChiComs had a stealthy senor node they could use to find, track, and provide missile guidance to our carriers over the horizon the DF 21/26 would be exponentially more dangerous. Now that the Marines have such a sensor it is not much of a surprise they want a missile for it to guide. The F-35 can actually do the task. No satellite can provide real time weapon tracking to a missile on a moving and maneuvering ship packed with ECMs. Anyone who thinks the capabilities of the F-35B are not driving this new Marine Corps need for a long range missile is not paying attention. |
|
Quoted:
You need to shop that to Vietnam and the Phillipines. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: It really depends on what your requirements are, but if you just want to defend a small atoll from limited attacks you could probably get a battery for 20-30 million. SAAB has had a lot of interest from small countries in SEA. |
|
Quoted:
We are. SAAB has had a lot of interest from small countries in SEA. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: It really depends on what your requirements are, but if you just want to defend a small atoll from limited attacks you could probably get a battery for 20-30 million. SAAB has had a lot of interest from small countries in SEA. |
|
|
Quoted: No, different. The F-35 can actually do the task. No satellite can provide real time weapon tracking to a missile on a moving and maneuvering ship packed with ECMs. Anyone who thinks the capabilities of the F-35B are not driving this new Marine Corps need for a long range missile is not paying attention. View Quote |
|
|
Quoted:
Kongsberg is working on a version of the NSM that will fit the F-35 View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: Somebody better tell the Marines that the missile they are looking at (NSM) doesn't take IFTUs then F-35 can't guide an NSM because the NSM does not accept In Flight Target Updates. It's purely a fire and forget weapon. |
|
Quoted:
Which has nothing to do with what I wrote. F-35 can't guide an NSM because the NSM does not accept In Flight Target Updates. It's purely a fire and forget weapon. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Somebody better tell the Marines that the missile they are looking at (NSM) doesn't take IFTUs then F-35 can't guide an NSM because the NSM does not accept In Flight Target Updates. It's purely a fire and forget weapon. |
|
Quoted: No, different. The F-35 can actually do the task. No satellite can provide real time weapon tracking to a missile on a moving and maneuvering ship packed with ECMs. Anyone who thinks the capabilities of the F-35B are not driving this new Marine Corps need for a long range missile is not paying attention. View Quote |
|
|
|
|
Timing of this article is interesting with the upcoming sumit with Lil Kim.
https://defensemaven.io/warriormaven/future-weapons/pentagon-developing-f-35s-to-kill-icbms-AfQPStTbykGh1lAgE2Od0A/ Destroying ICBMs is something quite different than tracking or intercepting a short or medium range ballistic missile. The F-35 is already developed in this capacity; the F-35 has been tested as an aerial node for the Navy’s Naval Integrated Fire Control - Counter Air system. This technology, now deployed, uses ship-based Aegis radar, an aerial sensor node and a guided SM-6 missile to knock out attacking missiles from ranges beyond-the-horizon. Since its inception, NIFC-CA used an E-2 Hawkeye surveillance plane as the aerial node. Now, the system can use a far more capable F-35 as the aerial sensor. View Quote |
|
Japan would love to sell some of these.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_12_Surface-to-Ship_Missile https://www.mhi.com/products/defense/type88_surface-to-ship_missile_ssm_1.html |
|
Quoted:
Japan would love to sell some of these. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_12_Surface-to-Ship_Missile https://www.mhi.com/products/defense/type88_surface-to-ship_missile_ssm_1.html View Quote https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hsiung_Feng_III |
|
|
|
Quoted:
No, different. The F-35 can actually do the task. No satellite can provide real time weapon tracking to a missile on a moving and maneuvering ship packed with ECMs. Anyone who thinks the capabilities of the F-35B are not driving this new Marine Corps need for a long range missile is not paying attention. View Quote Other weapons, because of long time of flight, small seeker search volumes, and a desire to minimize hitting white shipping require tight cues and IFTUs. The US builds weapons like this |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.