![]() ![]() Each side must carefully manage consumption and substitute away from bespoke weapons like Javelin missiles for more available systems. ![]() Neither Russia nor Ukraine have top ten economies, yet they are drawing down global munition stocks. The need for easy-to-manufacture designs is even more critical for expendable munitions. Historical examples include the Tiger Tank, Me-262, and sophisticated cruise missiles. The number of Shermans in Europe kept increasing because mechanics would have "knocked out" tanks back in battle within days.Īn adversary can make a powerful weapon irrelevant by sheer numbers if it is challenging to produce. Engineers carefully designed engines and suspensions for durability. The US designed the Sherman for reliability and repairability. The Soviets saw that tanks on the Eastern front rarely lasted 24 hours in battle and took planned obsolescence to the extreme to make the T-34 cheap. What capabilities a country has and its strategic position matter when choosing.Ī classic comparison is the US Sherman tank and the Soviet T-34 in World War II. The expensive one could be more vulnerable or less effective than hoped. The cheap system could lack the capability to score any kill against superior weapons or end up still being too expensive. Survivability can come from the ability to take damage (like having armor) or from deception (stealth, electronic interference, speed). The math tends to push design choices towards cheap, less survivable systems or pricier, long-lasting ones. There are many tradeoffs when designing weapons. The twenty US B-2 Bombers could deliver a one-time nuclear strike but could not eliminate thousands of Chinese ships, bases, and troop concentrations because of their low sortie rate and limited numbers. These can be classic smart weapons like GPS-gravity bombs but also include an Abrams tank that can reliably kill adversaries 3000 meters away with unguided shells.Īn enemy can grind unreliable weapons into the ground by forcing a high tempo. The sweet spot is accurate but cheap weapons. It is also challenging to produce and transport the mind-boggling mass inaccurate weapons require. In total war, boutique weapons won't be able to destroy enough enemies even if they are tactically successful. Several useful strategies emerge when fighting an existential war. But what happens if a war breaks out and both sides want to keep fighting? The munitions, ships, and planes required might be very different. Both countries have a relatively short-term view of hostilities, opting for complicated weapons and platforms that take years to build. In a previous post, I covered what the US military is doing to counter China. The Keys to Winning High Intensity Conflicts The Weapons That Win World Wars 2023 February 22 Twitter See all postsĪsymmetric advantages disappear when the gloves come off. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |