- 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
0
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:02 pm to Powerman
quote:
Not that simple
Can you define what you see as the overall problem, assuming you agree with the tittle and the OP?
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:03 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
So let me make sure I have this right.
We shouldn't be in Iran because they will rebound and replace their army, navy, missiles, drones, and all the factories they use to make them very quickly, but we will be years away from replacing our munitions that we used to bomb them back to the stone age.
Is that about right?
This is one of those things that sounds simple and logical but there is a paradox to it. Our weapons are superior. They're also more difficult and time consuming to manufacture. This isn't like WW2 weaponry where we can very quickly ramp up production.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:03 pm to Powerman
quote:
Not that simple
I put you down as the type that would have told your forbears the Panama Canal was a lost cause.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:06 pm to Murph4HOF
I'm sorry are you CENTCOM? Is this "source" declassified from the Pentagon?
GTOH
GTOH
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:10 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
I put you down as the type that would have told your forbears the Panama Canal was a lost cause.
Supplying WW2 was simple.
Replacing a 20% supply of one of our many weapons of war….. not so much.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:10 pm to Powerman
Ok, sure, superior weapons that are more difficult and time consuming to manufacture. But there’s also the matching superiority of the capabilities, resources and infrastructure to manufacture said superior weapons.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:11 pm to Murph4HOF
Yes and for 3 weeks we've been told they were out of everything. Sure Jan. Any leak about stockpiles is simply to help the MIC load up future contracts. I'm sure they appreciate you helping spread the word.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:12 pm to Powerman
quote:
It's not at a rate where using 850 a month is sustainable
The logical failure on your part is assuming the need to continue using 850 a month.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:13 pm to jammajin
quote:
Can you define what you see as the overall problem, assuming you agree with the tittle and the OP?
The complexity of the weapons makes them more difficult to drastically increase production output in a timely manner. You can have incremental increases but doubling or tripling production overnight is a pipe dream. Raytheon relies on other suppliers for components and those people would also need to increase production to make any of it possible. The circuitry for precision guidance systems, propulsion systems, explosives...all of these things have to scale in parallel with each other. And with this type of manufacturing you have to build out the infrastructure before you can do anything. You can't just spawn another factory (or expand an existing factory) for even a single component like turbofan propulsion systems quickly.
You also need to train and expand a very highly skilled niche work force to make a lot of this happen.
Bottom line even with throwing the biggest pile of cash you can imagine at the problem it doesn't get resolved over night.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:13 pm to pankReb
I pointed this out. He breezed past and went to “not so simple”.
Maybe the OP will come back and tell us his concerns.
Maybe the OP will come back and tell us his concerns.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:14 pm to Murph4HOF
Place another order, no biggee
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:14 pm to TigerMyth36
This entire thing is from extrapolating day 1 and 2 tomahawk usage out to the entire 4 weeks. Spoiler alert, we aren’t using them nearly as much now as the initial salvo. So insanely dumb that we keep being told we are running out of munitions every day and idiots keep falling for it.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:15 pm to pankReb
quote:
The logical failure on your part is assuming the need to continue using 850 a month.
I have acknowledged that we wouldn't do this even in a scenario where we had infinite weapons. The problem is even one month of doing that with a more incremental depletion does put a meaningful dent in existing stockpiles.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:16 pm to oldskule
quote:
Place another order, no biggee
Ignorance is strength
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:27 pm to Powerman
quote:
The complexity of the weapons makes them more difficult to drastically increase production output in a timely manner. You can have incremental increases but doubling or tripling production overnight is a pipe dream. Raytheon relies on other suppliers for components and those people would also need to increase production to make any of it possible. The circuitry for precision guidance systems, propulsion systems, explosives...all of these things have to scale in parallel with each other. And with this type of manufacturing you have to build out the infrastructure before you can do anything. You can't just spawn another factory (or expand an existing factory) for even a single component like turbofan propulsion systems quickly. You also need to train and expand a very highly skilled niche work force to make a lot of this happen. Bottom line even with throwing the biggest pile of cash you can imagine at the problem it doesn't get resolved over night.
I appreciate your reply and understand you concern about the replacement of weapons we have fired
The OPs article says we had 3000-4500 toms on hand and we fired 850 in the first 3 weeks. Presuming that’s true we utilized approx 20% of our toms to render the 16th most powerful military into the world so defenseless that we can fly Warthogs and anything else we want over any part of their country without impediment and take our time to drop any other bomb/weapon/supply/arms for citizens. Anything we want to do from the air we can now do. Without stealth without nothing. MOABs. Bombs that drop from planes not toms
We may not need to shoot another tom during the rest of the operation. So we can begin to resupply with little or no additional depletion need. This is how inventory works in any setting
We could do this same beginning of campaign firing of Toms thing in 4 other arenas of war (NK. China.
PIck 2 more ) simultaneously before we would “run out”.
And toms are one of our arsenal of weapons.
Can you explain to me again why we should be alarmed that we expended 20% of one of our weapons categories at the appropriate place in an engagement to expend said weapon in order to neutralize the opponents ability to allow us to proceed unimpeeded with the engagement
It seems like an appropriate use to me………..almost like our military knows more about what it’s doing than you, me, the OP or the rag that printed the OPs story
This post was edited on 3/28/26 at 3:32 pm
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:28 pm to Powerman
quote:
The problem is even one month of doing that with a more incremental depletion does put a meaningful dent in existing stockpiles.
….which can be replenished.
Manufacturing capabilities increase with demand. The usage will decline.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:40 pm to Powerman
quote:
Ignorance is strength
Your ignorance over manufacturing based on supply is absolutely your strength.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 4:02 pm to Murph4HOF
quote:
The Pentagon is alarmed by the rate at which Tomahawk cruise missile stocks have been depleted during ongoing operations against Iran, according to officials who spoke to The Washington Post.
“Officials”
Raytheon will start banging out 50 a month. The larger hard targets have mostly been hit. The mobile and smaller sites/targets are getting hit with Hellfire and other missiles, of which we have tens if not hundreds of thousands.
We also have a lot of missiles that were retired and are used for training..those are still stockpiled. We are fine.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 4:03 pm to tketaco
quote:I am not CENTCOM.
I'm sorry are you CENTCOM? Is this "source" declassified from the Pentagon?
GTOH
What gave it away?
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News