- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:48 am to notiger1997
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:48 am to notiger1997
There is a very old saying that artillery is the king of the battle field. That hasn't changed.
What has changed is two fold:
1) The US has allowed its manufacturing base to atrophy to the point where it is not capable of supporting sustained combat operations. During WW2, there were countless examples of factories retooling to pump out war materials. Those factories are all sitting overseas today.
All you have to do is get off the interstate and drive through the towns to see the remains of shut down manufacturing facilities.
2) The complexity of modern weapon systems makes replacing combat losses much more expensive and time-consuming. Even if we had the manufacturing base to convert to war time production, it would take years to bring it online...just what we're seeing with the attempts to ramp up artillery shell production.
In my opinion, the lack of suitable manufacturing capabilities is our biggest strategic risk today.
What has changed is two fold:
1) The US has allowed its manufacturing base to atrophy to the point where it is not capable of supporting sustained combat operations. During WW2, there were countless examples of factories retooling to pump out war materials. Those factories are all sitting overseas today.
All you have to do is get off the interstate and drive through the towns to see the remains of shut down manufacturing facilities.
2) The complexity of modern weapon systems makes replacing combat losses much more expensive and time-consuming. Even if we had the manufacturing base to convert to war time production, it would take years to bring it online...just what we're seeing with the attempts to ramp up artillery shell production.
In my opinion, the lack of suitable manufacturing capabilities is our biggest strategic risk today.
7
Posted on 12/20/23 at 9:14 am to Chromdome35
quote:
In my opinion, the lack of suitable manufacturing capabilities is our biggest strategic risk today.
I cannot upvote this comment enough...
Posted on 12/20/23 at 10:39 am to Chromdome35
People complain about the Lake City armory because their bullets are used by civilians, but it’s exactly this dual market that enables them to stay tooled up and ready to meet government demands. This should be the standard to follow as much as possible. Obviously it wont work for 155mm shells, but the government needs to be prepared to address this issue. The lack of domestic drone manufacturing is probably another issue to be looked at.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 11:18 am to Chromdome35
I started calling out the problem in defense manufacturing in this thread back in June of 22
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/display.aspx?sp=102925198&s=2&p=101373605#102925198
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/display.aspx?sp=102924918&s=2&p=101373605#102924918
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/display.aspx?sp=102892028&s=2&p=101373605#102892028
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/display.aspx?sp=102925198&s=2&p=101373605#102925198
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/display.aspx?sp=102924918&s=2&p=101373605#102924918
https://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/display.aspx?sp=102892028&s=2&p=101373605#102892028
quote:
I hope one of the takeaways from this war for the US and NATO is that the volume of ammunition consumed daily requires ample stores.
Modern weapon systems have long replenishment timelines, if current manufacturing capacity can’t replenish stocks fast enough to keep up with a war, you have to have a bigger stockpile so you can last long enough to bring additional manufacturing capacity online.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 11:22 am to Chromdome35
quote:
There is a very old saying that artillery is the king of the battle field. That hasn't changed.
What has changed is two fold:
1) The US has allowed its manufacturing base to atrophy to the point where it is not capable of supporting sustained combat operations. During WW2, there were countless examples of factories retooling to pump out war materials. Those factories are all sitting overseas today.
All you have to do is get off the interstate and drive through the towns to see the remains of shut down manufacturing facilities.
2) The complexity of modern weapon systems makes replacing combat losses much more expensive and time-consuming. Even if we had the manufacturing base to convert to war time production, it would take years to bring it online...just what we're seeing with the attempts to ramp up artillery shell production.
In my opinion, the lack of suitable manufacturing capabilities is our biggest strategic risk today.
Been noticing this for years. At the outset of WWII, for example, we had 4 carriers in the Pacific with a total of 8 operational. Four years later, that number was in the 60 range. America had a huge industrial base to convert to war time production. We don't have that anymore.
An incident that sticks in my mind from years ago was the delay in post hurricane clean up in Florida due to shipping time for sheetrock and screws from China.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 11:51 am to Chromdome35
quote:
All you have to do is get off the interstate and drive through the towns to see the remains of shut down manufacturing facilities.
Every time I take a train ride down to Wilmington or DC, I note the number of rundown former factory buildings beside the tracks. Those were once latent military power.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 12:29 pm to Chromdome35
quote:
What has changed is two fold:
1) The US has allowed its manufacturing base to atrophy to the point where it is not capable of supporting sustained combat operations. During WW2, there were countless examples of factories retooling to pump out war materials. Those factories are all sitting overseas today.
All you have to do is get off the interstate and drive through the towns to see the remains of shut down manufacturing facilities.
2) The complexity of modern weapon systems makes replacing combat losses much more expensive and time-consuming. Even if we had the manufacturing base to convert to war time production, it would take years to bring it online...just what we're seeing with the attempts to ramp up artillery shell production.
In my opinion, the lack of suitable manufacturing capabilities is our biggest strategic risk today.
The Newtron/Clinton tax reforms paid companies to call manufacturing sites to be mothballed and receive money for 5 years. That is way demolition of sites began around 2004 in earnest. Many of these companies shutdown to get paid while moving manufacturing overseas. The ones I know about moved to Turkey and India. The Turkish moves were for their Austrian subsidiaries and these were heavy steel fabrication plants, not tin knockers which most metal fab companies are.
When I was in St. Louis liquidating a steel foundry in the 1980's and supervising environmental remediation at a form GM plant (it made Corvette Stingrays back in the day), there was an adjacent artillery shell manufacturer which per everyone around, never produced a single usable shell. It operated in WWII through Vietnam. I have zero doubts that a lot of expenditures back in WWII were wasted like this
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News