Page:  / 5
Author
Message
Crash_Test_Dhimmi
Offline
Posts: 174
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:02:37 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Swoosh101:
Originally Posted By Sealy:
Originally Posted By Depidy_Dawg:
Huh, wonder how much a .50 cal round costs?
Either that or a d....d.d.d.dddrone.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Predator_and_Hellfire.jpg




http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs51/f/2009/320/0/0/Friendly_PREDATOR_MISSILE_by_adrak.jpg


I love the picture, but its a Reaper, not a Predator
Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38167
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:02:39 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Katana16j:

Amen.

If there is one general produced by WWII who truly "Got it" about the future of Warfare, it was Lemay.


Yep.

“The long range future of the AAF lies in the field of guided missiles."
Curtis Lemay, 1945
DarkNite
Offline
Posts: 9421
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:06:33 PM
I like this one better.

Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38168
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:16:07 PM


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?
Lord_Grey_Boots
Another misplaced Canuck.
NRA
Offline
Posts: 14408
Feedback: 100% (1)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:16:43 PM
If they can hit a bobbing dingy, they can hit a moving truck or tank. This is a test case, or a challenge, that stretches skills and technical requirements.

-ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ-
When I hear hoof beats, I look for horses, not zebras. Some folks look for unicorns.
Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38169
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:17:14 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Lord_Grey_Boots:
If they can hit a bobbing dingy, they can hit a moving truck or tank. This is a test case, or a challenge, that stretches skills and technical requirements.



yeah.
we have been hitting moving targets for a while now.
dport
Bringing back the BB - one 16-inch shell at a time
Military
Offline
Posts: 39126
Feedback: 100% (6)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:18:02 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Lord_Grey_Boots:
If they can hit a bobbing dingy, they can hit a moving truck or tank. This is a test case, or a challenge, that stretches skills and technical requirements.



yeah.
we have been hitting moving targets for a while now.

Small boats are much harder.
It follows than as certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious.
~ George Washington
Katana16j
Offline
Posts: 6329
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:19:19 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Speaking of which...

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/09/17/retire-b-1-fleet-to-save-future-bombers-defense-experts/
Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38170
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:19:59 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By dport:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Lord_Grey_Boots:
If they can hit a bobbing dingy, they can hit a moving truck or tank. This is a test case, or a challenge, that stretches skills and technical requirements.



yeah.
we have been hitting moving targets for a while now.

Small boats are much harder.


the laser thing on water is a good point and the more I think about it the more the counter measures (from the red side) start to come up.
I was referring more to LGB noting that this is a work up to trucks and tanks. I was noting that its the other way around.
we started with trucks.
H46Driver
Member
Military
Offline
Posts: 8380
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:24:13 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By dport:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Lord_Grey_Boots:
If they can hit a bobbing dingy, they can hit a moving truck or tank. This is a test case, or a challenge, that stretches skills and technical requirements.



yeah.
we have been hitting moving targets for a while now.

Small boats are much harder.


the laser thing on water is a good point and the more I think about it the more the counter measures (from the red side) start to come up.
I was referring more to LGB noting that this is a work up to trucks and tanks. I was noting that its the other way around.
we started with trucks.


Exactly. These boats are smaller, faster, more maneuverable and physics presents other challenges, one of which you noted. AH-64 brings a lot to this fight as well.
TheGrayMan
Home Security Moderator
Military
Offline
Posts: 31018
Feedback: 100% (5)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:33:15 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By ContrarianIndicator:
This seems adequate and significantly more cost effective than spending a $100,000s of dollars on b1 sorties.

http://youtu.be/RVnpY8HhTwU


Nice work.

A handful of competent riflemen could make boarding that ship a real bitch.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1.2
GMD d-- a+ C++ L++ w M e++++
PS--- PE++ Y++ t+ R- !tv b++++ D---
h---- A++ r+++ y+ z++++ k++ F+++/F4
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
H46Driver
Member
Military
Offline
Posts: 8382
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:39:10 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By TheGrayMan:
Originally Posted By ContrarianIndicator:
This seems adequate and significantly more cost effective than spending a $100,000s of dollars on b1 sorties.

http://youtu.be/RVnpY8HhTwU


Nice work.

A handful of competent riflemen could make boarding that ship a real bitch.


That's great for pirates.

This test wasn't about pirates trying to board a ship.
Katana16j
Offline
Posts: 6330
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:39:30 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By dport:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Lord_Grey_Boots:
If they can hit a bobbing dingy, they can hit a moving truck or tank. This is a test case, or a challenge, that stretches skills and technical requirements.



yeah.
we have been hitting moving targets for a while now.

Small boats are much harder.


I bet all the sailors say that.
Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38171
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 6:42:55 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Katana16j:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Speaking of which...

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/09/17/retire-b-1-fleet-to-save-future-bombers-defense-experts/


And why are still buying bombers?

"when satisfactory ground to ground missiles become standard equipment, the need for both air to ground and air to air weapons will be definitely decreased. Of great importance is the long range ground to ground guided missile. This will be the strategic long range bombardment airplane of the future."
Hap Arnold 1947
NavyDoc1
Member
Military
Offline
Posts: 17479
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:08:12 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By TexasRifleman1985:
.... Ummm.... I'm fairly sure that's a training bomb...


Bomber pilots training to drop training bombs on training targets during training missions... Stop the presses!




That's a pretty impressive hit, actually... Even with modern PGMs.

I guess the author of that article doesn't understand that pilots need to train? And you might as well give them very difficult targets to train against. Doesn't get a lot harder to hit than a motorized fishing boat with a screaming engine.

I would agree. This is more about a difficult training exercise and a demonstration of skill and technological ability than a policy decision.
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. ~Thomas Jefferson~
Cheesebeast
N is for Neville who died of Ennui.
Online
Posts: 9801
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:31:15 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By NavyDoc1:
This is more about a difficult training exercise and a demonstration of skill and technological ability than a policy decision.


I suspect it has to do with the .gov hatred of bass boats and is merely a continuation of Bush's War on Tourism.
NavyDoc1
Member
Military
Offline
Posts: 17480
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:34:23 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Cheesebeast:
Originally Posted By NavyDoc1:
This is more about a difficult training exercise and a demonstration of skill and technological ability than a policy decision.


I suspect it has to do with the .gov hatred of bass boats and is merely a continuation of Bush's War on Tourism.

Fucking bass boats. (grumble, grumble, grumble)
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. ~Thomas Jefferson~
PredatorWhacker
Team Member
Offline
Posts: 3249
Feedback: 100% (16)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:36:24 PM
At least with fiscal responsibility like this I have no worries about Social Security being around when I'm going to need it.
Make welfare as hard to get as a building permit.
SmilingBandit
Damn these electric sex pants!
Military
Online
Posts: 30126
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:37:58 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By PredatorWhacker:
At least with fiscal responsibility like this I have no worries about Social Security being around when I'm going to need it.

So what specifically is wasteful here?
"Upon further review, we have determined that the string itself is not a machinegun" -BATFE
qualityhardware
Aficiondo of old stuff
Offline
Posts: 3621
Feedback: 100% (6)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:38:27 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Qweevox:
That image sums up our problems so well


multi-million/billion dollar weapons platforms used against boats, mud huts, and goat-herders wielding AK-47's converted from shovels.

It makes no sense.

$16,000,000,000,000.00

Right damn with you.
LIBERTY

"I think the trick is to have your head up your ass, then this makes sense."
-Bohr Adam
MadProfessor
Gwar rules!!!
Military
Online
Posts: 8018
Feedback: 100% (1)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:41:11 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Katana16j:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Speaking of which...

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/09/17/retire-b-1-fleet-to-save-future-bombers-defense-experts/


And why are still buying bombers?

"when satisfactory ground to ground missiles become standard equipment, the need for both air to ground and air to air weapons will be definitely decreased. Of great importance is the long range ground to ground guided missile. This will be the strategic long range bombardment airplane of the future."
Hap Arnold 1947




Because then ARFCOM would get all pissy when we smack a fishing boat with a MIRV.



I'm kidding. I'm a believer that most of the USAF offensive capability should be pilotless and non-air breathing.
They're given me about 10,000 watts a day.
SmilingBandit
Damn these electric sex pants!
Military
Online
Posts: 30128
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:50:17 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By MadProfessor:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Katana16j:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Speaking of which...

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/09/17/retire-b-1-fleet-to-save-future-bombers-defense-experts/


And why are still buying bombers?

"when satisfactory ground to ground missiles become standard equipment, the need for both air to ground and air to air weapons will be definitely decreased. Of great importance is the long range ground to ground guided missile. This will be the strategic long range bombardment airplane of the future."
Hap Arnold 1947




Because then ARFCOM would get all pissy when we smack a fishing boat with a MIRV.



I'm kidding. I'm a believer that most of the USAF offensive capability should be pilotless and non-air breathing.

There are huge problems with chucking ballistic missiles at enemies that are not technical in nature.
"Upon further review, we have determined that the string itself is not a machinegun" -BATFE
Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38172
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 7:59:13 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By MadProfessor:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Katana16j:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Speaking of which...

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/09/17/retire-b-1-fleet-to-save-future-bombers-defense-experts/


And why are still buying bombers?

"when satisfactory ground to ground missiles become standard equipment, the need for both air to ground and air to air weapons will be definitely decreased. Of great importance is the long range ground to ground guided missile. This will be the strategic long range bombardment airplane of the future."
Hap Arnold 1947




Because then ARFCOM would get all pissy when we smack a fishing boat with a MIRV.



I'm kidding. I'm a believer that most of the USAF offensive capability should be pilotless and non-air breathing.


Airpower is inherently offensive and strategic.
MadProfessor
Gwar rules!!!
Military
Online
Posts: 8019
Feedback: 100% (1)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:00:02 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


There are huge problems with chucking ballistic missiles at enemies that are not technical in nature.


It doesn't have to be a ballistic missle.
They're given me about 10,000 watts a day.
dport
Bringing back the BB - one 16-inch shell at a time
Military
Offline
Posts: 39128
Feedback: 100% (6)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:00:58 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By MadProfessor:
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:


There are huge problems with chucking ballistic missiles at enemies that are not technical in nature.


It doesn't have to be a ballistic missle.

Then it gets very expensive very quickly. Recreating the human brain is not cheap.
It follows than as certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious.
~ George Washington
outofstep
Sado-Mathematist
Military
Offline
Posts: 4550
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:03:35 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Dunkelzahn:
Would the bomb even need to explode to be effective? What if we put a smart bomb kit on a 2,000 pound chunk of concrete?


Was just thinking the EXACT same thing. So much of this third world shit, just drop a big damn rock on it and you're good.
Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38173
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:04:19 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
There are huge problems with chucking ballistic missiles at enemies that are not technical in nature.


especially when your enemy has the same capability.
Its almost as if you would reach an equilibrium where direct conflict would be largely avoided and gains made through small, proxy wars that mostly concern challenges of influence over third parties.

hmmmmmm.
where have I heard this before?

“To stop the aggressor nation from even planning the attack, through fear of retaliation. Air power should be seen not as a war fighting instrument but as an instrument of national policy. One capable of toppling the diplomatic balance and perhaps eventually creating mutual deterrence through terror between two nations both capable of power air actions.”

Major General Andrews, commander of the General Headquarters of the Army Air Force in 1939
DarkNite
Offline
Posts: 9426
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:04:26 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Well, if that $500,000 sortie carries 24 stealthy anti-ship missiles 9,000 miles to take out a Chinese carrier group I'd say that's a powerful argument to it's value.
H46Driver
Member
Military
Offline
Posts: 8384
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:05:44 PM
[Last Edit: 9/18/2013 8:06:11 PM by H46Driver]
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By outofstep:
Originally Posted By Dunkelzahn:
Would the bomb even need to explode to be effective? What if we put a smart bomb kit on a 2,000 pound chunk of concrete?


Was just thinking the EXACT same thing. So much of this third world shit, just drop a big damn rock on it and you're good.


Only if you hit it. Bombs throw off nice frag patterns if HOB is set properly. Close enough counts with a bomb.
Sylvan
Team Member
NRAMilitary
Online
Posts: 38175
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:09:43 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By DarkNite:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Well, if that $500,000 sortie carries 24 stealthy anti-ship missiles 9,000 miles to take out a Chinese carrier group I'd say that's a powerful argument to it's value.


If the standoff is proper, you get the same effect with a P8.

Stop asking for an airframe.
ceverett
Offline
Posts: 14509
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:10:59 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By DarkNite:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Well, if that $500,000 sortie carries 24 stealthy anti-ship missiles 9,000 miles to take out a Chinese carrier group I'd say that's a powerful argument to it's value.

I'm all in favor of having some super-duper high end whiz-bang shit with all the trimmings.

I'm not in favor of using them to kill dirt farmers with rusty Mosin Nagants in Afghanistan.
dport
Bringing back the BB - one 16-inch shell at a time
Military
Offline
Posts: 39132
Feedback: 100% (6)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:12:20 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By DarkNite:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:


That is cool.
but do we really need a 500,000 per sortie bomber to do it?


Well, if that $500,000 sortie carries 24 stealthy anti-ship missiles 9,000 miles to take out a Chinese carrier group I'd say that's a powerful argument to it's value.


If the standoff is proper, you get the same effect with a P8.

Stop asking for an airframe.
No you don't.
It follows than as certain as that night succeeds the day, that without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious.
~ George Washington
2A373
Now a 2A377
NRAMilitary
Offline
Posts: 13305
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:14:56 PM
[Last Edit: 9/18/2013 8:15:15 PM by 2A373]
If one LGB being dropped is getting people worked up, then this will make their heads explode.









S_A_C
Instructor
Offline
Posts: 2570
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:47:07 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Qweevox:
Originally Posted By ContrarianIndicator:
That's not a jdam.

Seems like overkill.

Have you seen any of the liveleak videos posted here.

A bunch of morons cheering the annihilation of some goat-herder with a million dollar missile. Then they can't understand why a few of his sons want to take some flight lessons..

Blow back...it...is...a...bitch.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xV16qje8prk/TVut9b1WHBI/AAAAAAAADXA/NZEYMONqU0A/s1600/alpacino019.jpg



They would be fine with a B-52 caret bombing the entire village? That can be arranged.
S_A_C
Instructor
Offline
Posts: 2571
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 8:49:54 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Qweevox:
That image sums up our problems so wellhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2013/09/130904-F-XX000-023.jpg



multi-million/billion dollar weapons platforms used against boats, mud huts, and goat-herders wielding AK-47's converted from shovels.

It makes no sense.

$16,000,000,000,000.00

http://www.usdebtclock.org/


You do realize the point was just to showcase capability, and they are not actually planning on sinking motor boats with B-1's right?
SmilingBandit
Damn these electric sex pants!
Military
Online
Posts: 30130
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 9:21:26 PM
[Last Edit: 9/18/2013 9:21:47 PM by SmilingBandit]
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
There are huge problems with chucking ballistic missiles at enemies that are not technical in nature.


especially when your enemy has the same capability.
Its almost as if you would reach an equilibrium where direct conflict would be largely avoided and gains made through small, proxy wars that mostly concern challenges of influence over third parties.

hmmmmmm.
where have I heard this before?

“To stop the aggressor nation from even planning the attack, through fear of retaliation. Air power should be seen not as a war fighting instrument but as an instrument of national policy. One capable of toppling the diplomatic balance and perhaps eventually creating mutual deterrence through terror between two nations both capable of power air actions.”

Major General Andrews, commander of the General Headquarters of the Army Air Force in 1939


So we build these systems that are too powerful for either side to use...don't we still need more conventional forces to act in the proxy wars since we can't use our doomsday weapons?
"Upon further review, we have determined that the string itself is not a machinegun" -BATFE
MARINEORDIE
Put your face on auto slap!
NRAMilitary
Offline
Posts: 6652
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 9:25:23 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Dunkelzahn:
Would the bomb even need to explode to be effective? What if we put a smart bomb kit on a 2,000 pound chunk of concrete?

That is what you are looking at.
NRA Life Member since 1994
USMC Distinguished Pistol Shot 1997
IYAOYAS

"HAVING GUNS AND AMMO IS A BIT LIKE HAVING TANGIBLE STOCKS" Me
TheGrayMan
Home Security Moderator
Military
Offline
Posts: 31025
Feedback: 100% (5)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 9:32:41 PM
Long stick that boat.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1.2
GMD d-- a+ C++ L++ w M e++++
PS--- PE++ Y++ t+ R- !tv b++++ D---
h---- A++ r+++ y+ z++++ k++ F+++/F4
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
AeroE
I Was Free Born
Online
Posts: 48028
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 10:44:36 PM



Take that video with a giant grain of salt or two.

All you guys that think a JDAM kit can be strapped to a chunk of concrete please stop. It's an entertaining idea that will do nothing more than waste the kit.

It is not easy to explain Liberty to those that are not familiar with Liberty. Kevin Jamison, on explaining firearm regulation to a Massachusetts lawyer. Jeff City, Mo 18 Apr 13.
Dunkelzahn
Member
Online
Posts: 4025
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:06:17 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By AeroE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlaIl9J14H4

Take that video with a giant grain of salt or two.

All you guys that think a JDAM kit can be strapped to a chunk of concrete please stop. It's an entertaining idea that will do nothing more than waste the kit.

Yeah, the insanity! Who would be stupid enough to do something like that?
AeroE
I Was Free Born
Online
Posts: 48029
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:21:02 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Dunkelzahn:
Originally Posted By AeroE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlaIl9J14H4

Take that video with a giant grain of salt or two.

All you guys that think a JDAM kit can be strapped to a chunk of concrete please stop. It's an entertaining idea that will do nothing more than waste the kit.

Yeah, the insanity! Who would be stupid enough to do something like that?
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/07/world/us-wields-defter-weapon-against-iraq-concrete-bomb.html



That's not the same idea, and you know it.

That's a really old article, too.

It is not easy to explain Liberty to those that are not familiar with Liberty. Kevin Jamison, on explaining firearm regulation to a Massachusetts lawyer. Jeff City, Mo 18 Apr 13.
Mossberg
AKA "scattergun" the drunken cat herder
Offline
Posts: 4385
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:22:05 PM
I'd be a proud American if the next goat raper that tries to pull a USS Cole attack gets a 2,000 lb present from a B1B on his fucking head, directly.

Maybe that is just me though.
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS
hobbsar
Member
Offline
Posts: 11629
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:39:31 PM
For Somali pirates I would use the AC-130. Good range and loiter and lots of ammo. I don't imaging the Somalis have much in the way of anti aircraft weapons.

For Iranian speed boats smaller more manuverable aircraft would seem to be the ticket since you would be in range of Iranian air defenses.
Growing old is inevitable. Growing up is optional.
Dunkelzahn
Member
Online
Posts: 4026
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:42:41 PM
[Last Edit: 9/18/2013 11:45:44 PM by Dunkelzahn]
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By AeroE:
Originally Posted By Dunkelzahn:
Originally Posted By AeroE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlaIl9J14H4

Take that video with a giant grain of salt or two.

All you guys that think a JDAM kit can be strapped to a chunk of concrete please stop. It's an entertaining idea that will do nothing more than waste the kit.

Yeah, the insanity! Who would be stupid enough to do something like that?
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/07/world/us-wields-defter-weapon-against-iraq-concrete-bomb.html



That's not the same idea, and you know it.

That's a really old article, too.

Wait, so if it's old that means it never happened?

How is it not the same idea? Ok, I admit that saying "use a chunk of concrete" is simplified but I didn't want to type out "Take a GBU-24 practice munition, fill it with concrete and use it's guidance package to home in on the target."
hh47
Member
Online
Posts: 956
Feedback: 100% (1)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:54:39 PM

That's nice, but it needs more SNIPER pod.


SV650Squid
Initial Success or Total Failure
Military
Offline
Posts: 5236
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:57:42 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Qweevox:
That image sums up our problems so well


multi-million/billion dollar weapons platforms used against boats, mud huts, and goat-herders wielding AK-47's converted from shovels.

It makes no sense.

$16,000,000,000,000.00


Why would they be dropping an inert bomb (painted blue, only inert bombs are painted blue) on a dinghy?
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”

And I said, “Here am I. Send me!” - Isaiah 6:8
Madcap72
Political retraining camp counselor.
Military
Offline
Posts: 28365
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/18/2013 11:58:11 PM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Qweevox:
Originally Posted By The_Evil_One:
Good when you want to go out there OP and fight the enemy I'll remember to tell you why I couldn't call in CAS for you when your position is being overrun.

When you actually have some skin in the game come back to us.


I love the appeal to emotion. Even if it's totally ridiculous.


I'm sorry, has GD instituted a policy of formalized debate?


If not, then your reply is pointless.
Hardy har har, we'll stuff in you in the FEMA car!
GENESMITH
\-_-_-_-_-USN Retired-_-_-_-_-/
Military
Offline
Posts: 14683
Feedback: 100% (123)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/19/2013 12:04:41 AM
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By AmericanPeople:
Originally Posted By TerryC:
Has no one else noticed that R2D2 is driving the boat?



What is all the churned up water ahead of the boat? Is it being pulled and if so by a manned boat? I sure would want a LOOOONG tether between the two boats.



I imagine it was remote, similar to these jet ski's we used to play with:

Originally Posted By swingset:
I feel like printing this thread out on some quality paper, so I can go wipe my ass with it.
AeroE
I Was Free Born
Online
Posts: 48031
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/19/2013 12:25:48 AM
[Last Edit: 9/19/2013 12:27:14 AM by AeroE]
[Jump To Reply]Originally Posted By Dunkelzahn:
Originally Posted By AeroE:
Originally Posted By Dunkelzahn:
Originally Posted By AeroE:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlaIl9J14H4

Take that video with a giant grain of salt or two.

All you guys that think a JDAM kit can be strapped to a chunk of concrete please stop. It's an entertaining idea that will do nothing more than waste the kit.

Yeah, the insanity! Who would be stupid enough to do something like that?
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/10/07/world/us-wields-defter-weapon-against-iraq-concrete-bomb.html



That's not the same idea, and you know it.

That's a really old article, too.

Wait, so if it's old that means it never happened?

How is it not the same idea? Ok, I admit that saying "use a chunk of concrete" is simplified but I didn't want to type out "Take a GBU-24 practice munition, fill it with concrete and use it's guidance package to home in on the target."


Say what you mean then.

When do you suppose a concrete filled bomb was last dropped in Iraq or Afghanistan? How many were dropped?

It is not easy to explain Liberty to those that are not familiar with Liberty. Kevin Jamison, on explaining firearm regulation to a Massachusetts lawyer. Jeff City, Mo 18 Apr 13.
dpmmn
NRA Life Member
NRAMilitary
Offline
Posts: 64637
Feedback: 100% (169)
Link To This Post
Posted: 9/19/2013 12:29:32 AM
Jesus loves JDAM's
IYAOYAS
Page:  / 5