Javelin, the super weapon

[JasonC]

RT - why do I call it well balanced? Because -

they admit that Hezbollah fired thousands of AT weapons to harm only around 50 tanks

they admit that individual tanks sometimes sustained up to 25 hits and continued to function

they admit Hezbollah tactics were sometimes poor

they admit only fraction of the AT weapons used were late model stuff and that the older types were quite ineffective considering their numbers

they admit that some of the largest Israel occasions of loss were due mostly to poor Israeli tactics, coupled to the presence of some of Hezbollah's best equipment

they admit that Israeli personnel losses were low even where tanks were disabled, that penetrations were rarer than hits, etc.

they admit that armor largely worked, and that MBTs with serious armor remain the dominant tactical weapon systems.

They could have said "Hezbollah won because they had our technically superior latest AT weapons, Israel's edge is gone, armor is obsolete". They don't, because they are sober analysts telling the truth. Frankly, I've seen more ridiculous hype about the lessons of the Lebanon war from people on this board, than in what amounts to a Russian military equipment press release.

Can we please have even this level of objectivity about US weapon systems from their contractors and apologists? Whoops, sorry, not supposed to point that out...

[RT North Dakota]

Originally posted by JasonC:

RT - why do I call it well balanced? Because -

Dude (as my niece would say) relax already! Did I not say an excellent source? I was pulling your leg.

[flamingknives]

Re: the Israeli Spike

I understand that there were other considerations in the acquisition, including things like launch signature.

Certainly there is less reticence for buying Israeli that people seem to suggest. The uparmour kit for the Bulldog upgrade for the FV432 is from Rafael, the submunitions for the BL755 were Israeli, the new Watchkeeper UAV is an Israeli design.

[RT North Dakota]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Re: the Israeli Spike

I understand that there were other considerations in the acquisition, including things like launch signature.

Certainly there is less reticence for buying Israeli that people seem to suggest. The uparmour kit for the Bulldog upgrade for the FV432 is from Rafael, the submunitions for the BL755 were Israeli, the new Watchkeeper UAV is an Israeli design.

The Spike was the system recommended by ITDU, as a a result of the trials. Raytheon then leaked an un-true about Spike being used in Gaza, and the Government freaked out.

Spike wasn't used in Combat till Lebanon. When Raytheon was competeing against Spike in Australia, they said "can't buy Spike! Not combat proven!"

[Lightning War]

Just looking at things from a strategic standpoint... The javelin is an extremely expensive weapons system, regardless of the fact that it's a specialist item that's not used very often. If the US went bankrupt tomorrow - and that is possible (national debt now at $9 trillion) - how would it afford to manufacture such expensive, high-tech weaponry?

Countries such as China and Russia have had decades of experience manufacturing cheap and cheerful weapons such as the AK and the RPG. They could continue to do so even if their economies took a downturn. Sure, AKs and RPGs are not as effective as US weapons, but they're practical and simple and can be manufactured in large numbers. It is the very simplicity of such weapons that ensures even poor nations can afford and use them; an AK-47 costs very little to make and any idiot can use one!

I'm a gamer, not a military expert, but it appears to me as though US military doctrine is based upon having technological superiority and the vast financial resources to fund it. Weapons such as the javelin are all-well-and-good as long as you can afford to churn them out in sufficient numbers. The US might not be able to that for much longer.

Any thoughts?

[JasonC]

The US is not bankrupt, it is not going to go bankrupt, it is the richest country on earth and it earns $13.8 trillion annually out of its own productive efforts. The foreign debt of the US, on the other hand, is $3.7 trillion one-off, not annually.

The US actually earns as much on its foreign investments as it pays on its foreign debts, even though the latter is a larger nominal amount invested (because the former is mostly high return foreign direct investment or foreign stock investment, and the latter is mostly low yielding bonds).

In addition, the US spends only 4% of that GDP on its military, and the vast majority of that on personnel and operations, and the vast majority of the remainder on high tech major weapon systems for strategic, air, and naval warfare. Ground systems as a whole are a rounding error in its military costs, and munitions (rather than vehicles and communications) are a rounding error within that.

But those economic points aside, the efficiency of any weapon comes not from its absolute cost but from the effect generated per unit of cost. Advanced smart weapons are radically more effective than simply RPGs.

Not just absolutely, they are also radically more effective per unit of cost. All the cheap AT weapons fired at us over 4 years in Iraq have disabled on the order of 100 armored vehicles, while getting most of the operators killed. Just 3000 TOW missiles disabled over 10 times as much in Gulf war I in as many days, with easy victory and low casualties as a result.

Moreover, the US is limited in high quality manpower, which it pays a lot for, far more than it is in capital, and it does not make sense to field millions of cheap weapons carried by expensive soldiers. Nor would its national objectives be better met by mass conscript armies bearing cheap weapons, because it is more constrained by political factors than direct military ones, let alone economic ones.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Lightning War]

Whether or not the US is, or is likely to be, economically bankrupt is debatable.

However, the reliance of the US military on 'high tech' could be its Achilles heel. Why? Three VERY SCARY letters...

...EMP

[ September 05, 2007, 05:29 PM: Message edited by: Lightning War ]

[GDog]

And here I was thinking this thread was going to help me develop tactics to counter the Javelin...ooops

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[JonS]

Originally posted by AdamL:

You counter a javelin team with HE.

... or four tanks.

[Renaud]

If the US went bankrupt tomorrow - and that is possible (national debt now at $9 trillion)

Considering that the biggest holders of US debt instruments are also the largest exporters to the US (china and japan are the #1 and #2 holders of US debt), it's unlikely they would shoot themselves in the foot by unloading this debt and weakening the dollar, thus decreasing their export income dramatically.

So as long as they are dependent on us to buy their export goods, our debt is safe. Obviously this will change over time as our debt continues to increase and non-US countries begin to account for a larger share of Chinese/Japanese exports.

But of course when you hit your practical debt limit, there's always the trusty fall-back of taxation and inflation (think 1960's-70's Britain and US). Of course that kills you in the end too...

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[JonS]

Originally posted by Adam1:

The problem with countering with 4 tanks is that you'll probably lose a tank

Given that a section has three jav missiles, you'll probably lose three. Which is why I suggested countering with four

[thewood]

But tanks are not AKs and RPGs. I think any general would trade three Javelins for three tanks. For most countries, tanks are the single biggest ground warfare (and maybe over all) investment they make. As Jason said, the cost of Javelins is a rounding error compared to the cost of getting a US soldier trained and in the fight.

Comparing RPGs and Javaelins is crazy. Its like comparing a cannon to a rifle. Yeah they both kill people, but at 1000m, I'd not worried about the rifle, but I'd be scared crapless of the cannon.

[JonS]

I'm talking about the game. Javelins might be a rounding error in Real Life™, but in the game tanks are free.

P.S., 'twas also a silly allusion to human wave attacks, and sending bodies over the top until the enemy runs out of bullets