|
MOAB story
The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about
this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. |
MOAB story
|
MOAB story
7:21 AMKeyser Soze - show quoted text - I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. ..... It also took out a tunnel system loaded with thousands of tons of munitions and supplies. Looks like your military solved that one. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 8:21 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. The primary objective wasn't to kill anyone although ridding the planet of 36 more terrorists was an added benefit. It's primary purpose was to destroy the caves and tunnels being used as a "safe zone" for ISIS terrorists who were avoiding our forces by temporarily fleeing to Pakastan. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 9:28 AM, Tim wrote:
7:21 AMKeyser Soze - show quoted text - I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. .... It also took out a tunnel system loaded with thousands of tons of munitions and supplies. Looks like your military solved that one. Yeah, like it'll take a week or so to replace the supplies. Total waste of money. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 9:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/15/2017 8:21 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. The primary objective wasn't to kill anyone although ridding the planet of 36 more terrorists was an added benefit. It's primary purpose was to destroy the caves and tunnels being used as a "safe zone" for ISIS terrorists who were avoiding our forces by temporarily fleeing to Pakastan. There are hundreds of caves and tunnels, as the Russkies learned. It was a wasted effort, except, of course, for the PR Trump thought would help him. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 10:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 9:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 8:21 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. The primary objective wasn't to kill anyone although ridding the planet of 36 more terrorists was an added benefit. It's primary purpose was to destroy the caves and tunnels being used as a "safe zone" for ISIS terrorists who were avoiding our forces by temporarily fleeing to Pakastan. There are hundreds of caves and tunnels, as the Russkies learned. It was a wasted effort, except, of course, for the PR Trump thought would help him. The US military has confirmed this week that the root of all the problems in the Middle East was that there just wasn’t a big enough bomb. Until now… US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis commented, “I’ve been looking at this issue for some time, first in my role as Commander of CENTCOM and now as a senior advisor to the Toddler-in-Chief. And the conclusion I’ve come to is that we just weren’t dropping big enough bombs. This was really brought home to me earlier this week when the President authorized us to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles at Syria. Sure, they looked really cool but they made really small bangs. Unless of course, you happened to be standing under one, in which case for those people, well, you know.” “But now in the beautiful shape of the Mother of All Bombs (MOAB), we have the solution. If I may a coin a phrase it is indeed ‘bigly’. We’ve run a test in Afghanistan and I’m pleased to say that shortly after it incinerated several dozen of their fighters, the Islamic State has thrown in the towel. Job done! The plan at present is to drop one on Libya this coming Monday, then two more on Iraq on Tuesday, followed on Wednesday by whatever we have left onto Syria. If all goes well we intend to solve the Arab-Israeli dispute by handing Israel and Egypt 50 MOABs each and letting them have at it. Frankly, I’m surprised we’re the first Administration to think of this.” http://tinyurl.com/ktpgh4w |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA |
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 10:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 9:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 8:21 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. The primary objective wasn't to kill anyone although ridding the planet of 36 more terrorists was an added benefit. It's primary purpose was to destroy the caves and tunnels being used as a "safe zone" for ISIS terrorists who were avoiding our forces by temporarily fleeing to Pakastan. There are hundreds of caves and tunnels, as the Russkies learned. It was a wasted effort, except, of course, for the PR Trump thought would help him. Well, if that's the case, we have 14 more of those MOAB's in inventory. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 11:17 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/15/2017 10:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 9:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 8:21 AM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. The primary objective wasn't to kill anyone although ridding the planet of 36 more terrorists was an added benefit. It's primary purpose was to destroy the caves and tunnels being used as a "safe zone" for ISIS terrorists who were avoiding our forces by temporarily fleeing to Pakastan. There are hundreds of caves and tunnels, as the Russkies learned. It was a wasted effort, except, of course, for the PR Trump thought would help him. Well, if that's the case, we have 14 more of those MOAB's in inventory. And after we use them up, we'll still be leaving Afghanistan without a resolution. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 11:27:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. I do have an idea about the expiration date. I was in ordinance for 6 years. They had it set at 20 years on WWII surplus and that is why we were shooting 12,000 rounds of 50 cal along with thousands of rounds of 30-06 and .45. (1965) We either shot it or threw it overboard. They also said all of our 5" ammo was going to be scrapped the next time we were in the yards but we still threw anything showing signs of "exudate" overboard. I assume storage has been more of an issue in ammo made that was not planned to be shot right away like these MOABs but the guy at Eglin said he expected these to be demilled so I am guessing they were fixin to expire. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. It was not tested on a real target. I don't think we have any caves we will let the pentagon destroy. Going bang in the Nevada desert is not a test of anything but the trigger device and perhaps the guidance system although a BLP round would do that You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. I just have a cynical opinion whenever we are killing people and blowing stuff up "for peace". We have had 3 major wars in my 70 years, including the current one that has lasted 25 years and none of them made anything better. |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 11:31:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: They are not 20 years old. Designed in 2003, produced sometime after. So, maybe 12-13 years at most. But, that's beside the point. So 20 may still be the number. Some of your computers are much older than that and you still use them. :-) My computers do not exude an explosive goo. |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 12:27:27 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 4/15/17 11:17 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Well, if that's the case, we have 14 more of those MOAB's in inventory. And after we use them up, we'll still be leaving Afghanistan without a resolution. Don't worry, I imagine the appropriation to build more is already bouncing around DC. I think they should ditch the guidance package, ditch the high tech bomb case and just fill old gas station fuel tanks with ammonium nitrate. They could make those for less than the price of a new F150 and get a bigger bang. Precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius is like putting a 20 power scope on a blunderbus |
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 12:30 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." The only way to make your dreams come true is to forever ban conflicts and wars and expect everyone on the planet to honor it. How realistic is that? I think Eisenhower had that in mind when he generated your quote. It sure would be nice ... but.... |
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 12:48 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 11:27:11 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. I do have an idea about the expiration date. I was in ordinance for 6 years. They had it set at 20 years on WWII surplus and that is why we were shooting 12,000 rounds of 50 cal along with thousands of rounds of 30-06 and .45. (1965) We either shot it or threw it overboard. They also said all of our 5" ammo was going to be scrapped the next time we were in the yards but we still threw anything showing signs of "exudate" overboard. I assume storage has been more of an issue in ammo made that was not planned to be shot right away like these MOABs but the guy at Eglin said he expected these to be demilled so I am guessing they were fixin to expire. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. It was not tested on a real target. I don't think we have any caves we will let the pentagon destroy. Going bang in the Nevada desert is not a test of anything but the trigger device and perhaps the guidance system although a BLP round would do that You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. I just have a cynical opinion whenever we are killing people and blowing stuff up "for peace". We have had 3 major wars in my 70 years, including the current one that has lasted 25 years and none of them made anything better. Come on Greg. A WWII vintage 5-inch shell or ammo for a .45 isn't the same as a $15M bomb (not counting development costs) that undergoes regular updating for improvements. We only built 15 of them. They aren't "throwaways". Geeze. As for wars and killing of people, it's been going on since we emerged from caves. What makes you think it's going to stop in your lifetime? It sure would be nice but it just isn't realistic. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 1:45 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/15/2017 12:30 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." The only way to make your dreams come true is to forever ban conflicts and wars and expect everyone on the planet to honor it. How realistic is that? I think Eisenhower had that in mind when he generated your quote. It sure would be nice ... but.... Despite the trillions we have spent and the thousands of American soldier lives we have sacrificed, we seem incapable of winning "unconventional" wars against determined ideological enemies. We have to find other, better ways of dealing with extremists. I don't think we expend enough effort in that direction. Yet another aircraft carrier or another supersonic fighter jet isn't going to make a difference. |
MOAB story
|
MOAB story
|
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 13:51:30 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Come on Greg. A WWII vintage 5-inch shell or ammo for a .45 isn't the same as a $15M bomb (not counting development costs) that undergoes regular updating for improvements. We only built 15 of them. They aren't "throwaways". Geeze. Since when has DoD cared about the cost of things they throw away? If it really has TNT in it, it certainly has a ticking clock. (I still bet it is a mix of RDX and ammonium nitrate) There are strict rules about classes of ordinance and what is service ready, training or trash, based on the age. They know nothing lasts forever. There are certainly expiration dates on ordinance. The guidance package may actually expire before the bomb, just because of capacitor degradation. My 20 year old PCs are becoming few and far between because of that fact alone. I do not have a single socket 7 board that still works. As for wars and killing of people, it's been going on since we emerged from caves. What makes you think it's going to stop in your lifetime? It sure would be nice but it just isn't realistic. I understand that but every little regional grievance should not require a US response. Why are we in Afghanistan? The terrorists are in Pakistan. I do notice the speed of our response seems to be inversely proportional to the amount of melanin in their skin. A dead little white (looking) girl will create a demand for action but thousands of dead black kids in Africa (or the US) is just the "rub of the green". That seems to span both political parties and the liberal/conservative divide. |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 14:02:32 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:12 PM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 12:27:27 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:17 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Well, if that's the case, we have 14 more of those MOAB's in inventory. And after we use them up, we'll still be leaving Afghanistan without a resolution. Don't worry, I imagine the appropriation to build more is already bouncing around DC. I think they should ditch the guidance package, ditch the high tech bomb case and just fill old gas station fuel tanks with ammonium nitrate. They could make those for less than the price of a new F150 and get a bigger bang. Precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius is like putting a 20 power scope on a blunderbus Your idea of a bomb has one major problem in being unguided and possibly along other design issues. It's use would likely be in violation of international law. Or maybe you are saying we should do the same thing that people like Assad and others do? Huh? there is nothing about the size of a conventional explosive in the Hague conventions. I am also not sure where the Assad connection is other than any bomb is fairly indiscriminate and a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius more so that others. Why is "guided" so important with a bomb like that which is dropped from low altitude and makes such a big hole? Guided is important with little bombs. Big bombs, not so much. It is like when Tibbets was so concerned with hitting one particular bridge when the whole city was going to be in the fire ball. |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 08:21:15 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. Thanks, Krause, I'd predicted the liberals would whine about the cost. Took you a couple days, but you didn't let me down. |
MOAB story
|
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 1:53 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 1:45 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 12:30 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." The only way to make your dreams come true is to forever ban conflicts and wars and expect everyone on the planet to honor it. How realistic is that? I think Eisenhower had that in mind when he generated your quote. It sure would be nice ... but.... Despite the trillions we have spent and the thousands of American soldier lives we have sacrificed, we seem incapable of winning "unconventional" wars against determined ideological enemies. We have to find other, better ways of dealing with extremists. I don't think we expend enough effort in that direction. Yet another aircraft carrier or another supersonic fighter jet isn't going to make a difference. You won't like this, but I believe it. We haven't fought a "war" since WWII that politics didn't over-ride military objectives. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 2:42 PM, Poco Deplorevole wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 08:21:15 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. Thanks, Krause, I'd predicted the liberals would whine about the cost. Took you a couple days, but you didn't let me down. Indeed, Afghanistan isn't worth the price of another American soldier's life...unless, of course, it would be your life. As for the dollars we are wasting there, there is better use for them at home, rebuilding this crumbling country. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 2:24 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 14:02:32 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:12 PM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 12:27:27 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:17 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Well, if that's the case, we have 14 more of those MOAB's in inventory. And after we use them up, we'll still be leaving Afghanistan without a resolution. Don't worry, I imagine the appropriation to build more is already bouncing around DC. I think they should ditch the guidance package, ditch the high tech bomb case and just fill old gas station fuel tanks with ammonium nitrate. They could make those for less than the price of a new F150 and get a bigger bang. Precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius is like putting a 20 power scope on a blunderbus Your idea of a bomb has one major problem in being unguided and possibly along other design issues. It's use would likely be in violation of international law. Or maybe you are saying we should do the same thing that people like Assad and others do? Huh? there is nothing about the size of a conventional explosive in the Hague conventions. I am also not sure where the Assad connection is other than any bomb is fairly indiscriminate and a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius more so that others. Why is "guided" so important with a bomb like that which is dropped from low altitude and makes such a big hole? Guided is important with little bombs. Big bombs, not so much. It is like when Tibbets was so concerned with hitting one particular bridge when the whole city was going to be in the fire ball. Much more recent than the Hague conventions Greg and much more complex. Barrel bombs were addressed in the UN as recently as 2014, directly as a result of the Syrian Civil War. In order to lawfully used, they must have a direct military objective with ... and this is important ... "proportional" potential of civilian death or injury. What is proportional really isn't spelled out but the risk of collateral damage using a barrel bomb is significantly higher than that of a precision guided bomb. Use of a barrel bomb on civilian populated areas, even if there are military objectives is banned and against international law. There is more to using precision guided ordnance than just hitting the target. Precision guided ordnance also reduces the risk of collateral damage. |
MOAB story
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 1:45 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 12:30 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." The only way to make your dreams come true is to forever ban conflicts and wars and expect everyone on the planet to honor it. How realistic is that? I think Eisenhower had that in mind when he generated your quote. It sure would be nice ... but.... Despite the trillions we have spent and the thousands of American soldier lives we have sacrificed, we seem incapable of winning "unconventional" wars against determined ideological enemies. We have to find other, better ways of dealing with extremists. I don't think we expend enough effort in that direction. Yet another aircraft carrier or another supersonic fighter jet isn't going to make a difference. We could be a lot closer to winning, if it could be called that, if we had functional rules of engagement. |
MOAB story
On 4/15/17 3:29 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 1:45 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 12:30 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." The only way to make your dreams come true is to forever ban conflicts and wars and expect everyone on the planet to honor it. How realistic is that? I think Eisenhower had that in mind when he generated your quote. It sure would be nice ... but.... Despite the trillions we have spent and the thousands of American soldier lives we have sacrificed, we seem incapable of winning "unconventional" wars against determined ideological enemies. We have to find other, better ways of dealing with extremists. I don't think we expend enough effort in that direction. Yet another aircraft carrier or another supersonic fighter jet isn't going to make a difference. We could be a lot closer to winning, if it could be called that, if we had functional rules of engagement. How so, Billy Boy? Napalm everything living? More Agent Orange? Nukes? |
MOAB story
|
MOAB story
On 4/15/2017 6:06 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 12:50:07 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 11:31:37 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: They are not 20 years old. Designed in 2003, produced sometime after. So, maybe 12-13 years at most. But, that's beside the point. So 20 may still be the number. Some of your computers are much older than that and you still use them. :-) My computers do not exude an explosive goo. === Yet. Have you ever seen an old electrolytic capacitor blow up? One of my childhood acquaintances had one go right through the ceiling. Never saw one explode that violently. The ones I saw just bulged the top or bottom out until one of them ruptured, releasing the gases. |
MOAB story
|
MOAB story
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 3:29 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 1:45 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 12:30 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." The only way to make your dreams come true is to forever ban conflicts and wars and expect everyone on the planet to honor it. How realistic is that? I think Eisenhower had that in mind when he generated your quote. It sure would be nice ... but.... Despite the trillions we have spent and the thousands of American soldier lives we have sacrificed, we seem incapable of winning "unconventional" wars against determined ideological enemies. We have to find other, better ways of dealing with extremists. I don't think we expend enough effort in that direction. Yet another aircraft carrier or another supersonic fighter jet isn't going to make a difference. We could be a lot closer to winning, if it could be called that, if we had functional rules of engagement. How so, Billy Boy? Napalm everything living? More Agent Orange? Nukes? If you are getting shot at, you can kill the attackers! If you have group attacking your unit and a bunch of kids are carrying ammo. They all die. You do not wait for 10 hours before air support arrives. I said rules of engagement. Not what weapons are used. If a town is full of The enemy and no one in towns tries to warn us. Good chance everyone in town dies. The culture understands brute force. |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 14:44:35 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 4/15/2017 2:18 PM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 13:51:30 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Come on Greg. A WWII vintage 5-inch shell or ammo for a .45 isn't the same as a $15M bomb (not counting development costs) that undergoes regular updating for improvements. We only built 15 of them. They aren't "throwaways". Geeze. Since when has DoD cared about the cost of things they throw away? If it really has TNT in it, it certainly has a ticking clock. (I still bet it is a mix of RDX and ammonium nitrate) I don't know and you don't know. You are "betting". I am sure a few minutes poking around and you could find a more knowledgable article than Time magazine and they would tell you the explosive. These are still just blunt force weapons and there is no reason to keep the filler secret. There are strict rules about classes of ordinance and what is service ready, training or trash, based on the age. They know nothing lasts forever. There are certainly expiration dates on ordinance. The guidance package may actually expire before the bomb, just because of capacitor degradation. My 20 year old PCs are becoming few and far between because of that fact alone. I do not have a single socket 7 board that still works. Heh. You're comparing your 20 year old PC with a mil-spec guidance system that is subject to regular upgrades? Maybe you have forgotten some of your USCG days Greg. The military doesn't just store away equipment in a storage shed for 20 years in case they may need it someday. Each branch of the services has a "Planned Maintenance Program" for virtually *everything* they use or have in inventory. Regular tests are done, some weekly, some monthly, some annually depending on what the equipment is and there are specific requirements the equipment must meet. If they don't they are repaired, if the repair is not economically feasible there is a complex procedure for retiring it and taking it off the books. The Planned Maintenance Program also deals with scheduled upgrades and improvements as they become available. In the case of the actual ordinance, the "plan" is you throw the old stuff away. Ammo, explosives and the fuzes degrade chemically and there is no "fixing" that. A agree the guidance package might get "fixed" but that fix is probably throw away all of the cards and install new ones. The world of electronics has changed a lot since we were soldering parts in on the ship. If they still fixed things, I might still be at IBM. ;-) |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 14:47:04 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: You won't like this, but I believe it. We haven't fought a "war" since WWII that politics didn't over-ride military objectives. When you are in civil wars, you have political decisions being made. We stay in denial about what the fighting and dying is about because there is no real military objective. Syria is an excellent example. What is the strategic military objective there? Defeat ISIS? ISIS is an idea, not an army and they are everywhere Take down Assad? Not really. We don't even have a plan for a successor, that is Putin's problem with it. Liberate the Kurds? Turkey is against that idea. Tell me again, why are we in Syria? That really goes double for Afghanistan. We should have got out of there when Delta ran Bin Laden off into Pakistan at Tora Bora. |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 19:29:46 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote: We could be a lot closer to winning, if it could be called that, if we had functional rules of engagement. Winning is not included in the game plan. We don't even have a plan of what a win looks like, same as Vietnam. |
MOAB story
|
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 14:55:11 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 2:42 PM, Poco Deplorevole wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 08:21:15 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 7:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I read where the bomb killed a couple of dozen people. Big ****ing Deal. At some point, we'll just pull out of Afghanistan and stop wasting American lives and American money. Your not-so-almighty military isn't going to solve it. Thanks, Krause, I'd predicted the liberals would whine about the cost. Took you a couple days, but you didn't let me down. Indeed, Afghanistan isn't worth the price of another American soldier's life...unless, of course, it would be your life. As for the dollars we are wasting there, there is better use for them at home, rebuilding this crumbling country. It's so funny. You weren't spouting your crap a few years back. |
MOAB story
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 15:34:22 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/15/17 3:29 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 1:45 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 12:30 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/15/17 11:27 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/15/2017 10:36 AM, wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:40:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/15/2017 1:20 AM, wrote: The Snooze Press (Ft Myers paper) had an interesting article about this bomb. It was developed at Eglin AFB in the pan handle and they were talking to a guy there. It turns out this is the most expensive barrel bomb I have ever heard of. These are 16 million a pop. I am not quite sure why you need precision guidance on a bomb with a 1 mile blast radius but it has it. I am still not sure why it is so expensive but it is a DoD project. The guy was saying he really expected these things to be "demilled" (scrapped) probably because they were approaching their expiration date. I suppose it was "use it or lose it" for the air force. I am still not sure how effective it actually was but since it is really a "shock and awe" weapon, I suppose we shocked someone using it. In typical fashion, the russians just packed a bigger tank with explosive and have a bigger one but I am not sure if it is guided and I know it was a lot cheaper. If you believe the Pentagon, it was the perfect weapon for the intended purpose. Apparently several attempts by Afghan forces (with American special force advisers) had been made with boots on the ground to clear the caves and tunnels of ISIS without success. They just ran through the tunnels into Pakistan. The MOAB took care of that problem. I don't believe the pentagon on much, particularly on untested weapons. When I see things like this I am reminded of the navy/marines in the Pacific in WWII. They would lob thousands of 16" shells onto islands to kill the nips in the caves, then go ashore and find out, they might be shaken up but they were still alive and shooting. Our ability to root people out of tunnels and caves has always been spotty and we always seem to come up with a new idea that doesn't really work as well as we hoped. I still think we used that one because it was coming up on it's expiration date and they knew Trump liked the idea of "biggest" anything. I am still waiting for a real BDA You, nor I, have any idea of what the "expiration date" is on those bombs, so that's a pretty silly conclusion. It's not "untested". It was designed and tested for a specific purpose. Until now, there wasn't an appropriate target for it. You and Harry are the most cynical people I know when it comes to things like this ... or anything new. I have far more faith in what experts in the defense department think we need as options. Maybe it's because I worked with them often over the years. They are not all job protecting, resource spending bureaucrats that some people automatically assume they are. In fact, they were more interested in reducing costs, reducing unnecessary complexity and making program objectives more efficient. Even the "mil-spec" requirements for most of the electronics were dropped in favor of qualified, commercial grade components. Perhaps I get my cynicism about the military from Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." The only way to make your dreams come true is to forever ban conflicts and wars and expect everyone on the planet to honor it. How realistic is that? I think Eisenhower had that in mind when he generated your quote. It sure would be nice ... but.... Despite the trillions we have spent and the thousands of American soldier lives we have sacrificed, we seem incapable of winning "unconventional" wars against determined ideological enemies. We have to find other, better ways of dealing with extremists. I don't think we expend enough effort in that direction. Yet another aircraft carrier or another supersonic fighter jet isn't going to make a difference. We could be a lot closer to winning, if it could be called that, if we had functional rules of engagement. How so, Billy Boy? Napalm everything living? More Agent Orange? Nukes? Agent Orange could definitely cut down the opium production. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:54 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com