Obama to kill Navy?s Tomahawk, Hellfire missiles
Is there any replacement missle and/or system to safe guard our fleet?Like a rail gun system or laser weapons?
Any expert navy personnel out here on GunBroker?
serf
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/25/obama-kill-navys-tomahawk-hellfire-missile-program/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
The proposed elimination of these missile programs came as a shock to lawmakers and military experts, who warned ending cutting these missiles would significantly erode America's ability to deter enemy forces.
Any expert navy personnel out here on GunBroker?
serf
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/25/obama-kill-navys-tomahawk-hellfire-missile-program/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
The proposed elimination of these missile programs came as a shock to lawmakers and military experts, who warned ending cutting these missiles would significantly erode America's ability to deter enemy forces.
0
-
We don't need them, they are middle-age level technology. If we bring our troops home and mind our own business we could eliminate many weapon systems and sleep safer at night doing so.. 0 -
Don't these funds have to be voted on by Congress? Where's
the outrage from the Joint Chiefs of Staff?0 -
Guess they're more worried about a pension than the well
being of their country.0 -
The Tomahawk is a ground attack cruise missile, offensive in nature and not a fleet defense weapon.
The Hellfire likewise is a laser guided ground attack weapon, through there is no reason it could not be targeted on a surface vessel. Again, not a fleet defense weapon, but a weapon that has been used extensively an successfully in the anti-armor role during actual war, and against suspected bad guys via drone attacks in our terror war on terror.
The reduction in these two weapons systems will do nothing to reduce the ability of a carrier task force to protect itself. It will, however, limit our ability to remote-control kill people we have never seen.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
The Tomahawk is a ground attack cruise missile, offensive in nature and not a fleet defense weapon.
The Hellfire likewise is a laser guided ground attack weapon, through there is no reason it could not be targeted on a surface vessel. Again, not a fleet defense weapon, but a weapon that has been used extensively an successfully in the anti-armor role during actual war, and against suspected bad guys via drone attacks in our terror war on terror.
The reduction in these two weapons systems will do nothing to reduce the ability of a carrier task force to protect itself. It will, however, limit our ability to remote-control kill people we have never seen.
My step son is a former District of Columbia Attorney General who was in charge of 600 attorneys, fired by his class mate from Harvard Law Obama in 2012, know he's VP for a defensive missile company, I do not get any info from him, he is very closed mouthed, the most info I get on missiles is from this forum.0 -
quote:Originally posted by blogdog37
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
The Tomahawk is a ground attack cruise missile, offensive in nature and not a fleet defense weapon.
The Hellfire likewise is a laser guided ground attack weapon, through there is no reason it could not be targeted on a surface vessel. Again, not a fleet defense weapon, but a weapon that has been used extensively an successfully in the anti-armor role during actual war, and against suspected bad guys via drone attacks in our terror war on terror.
The reduction in these two weapons systems will do nothing to reduce the ability of a carrier task force to protect itself. It will, however, limit our ability to remote-control kill people we have never seen.
My step son is a former District of Columbia Attorney General who was in charge of 600 attorneys, fired by his class mate from Harvard Law Obama in 2012, know he's VP for a defensive missile company, I do not get any info from him, he is very closed mouthed, the most info I get on missiles is from this forum.
My information is from when I was in the Nave 30+ years ago, reading Jane's up to about 10 years ago, and following various defense related stories as they pop up.
In other words, not a hell of a lot better informed than are you.[:)]0 -
Don't be modest Don your a plenty smart knowledgeable guy. 0 -
Here's another one for you. The obidiot wants to cancel the A-10 that was just upgraded to a C model. The upgrades include all the things they needed for the first gulf war, also it's the only plane the Russian armor is afraid of. 0 -
I have written several times on GB Dis Forum over the last couple of years about the rail gun being developed at Dahlgren NWS and will be operational soon. It is public knowledge and I have personally seen it in the nondescript metal shed at Dahlgren on the firing line. The rail gun doesn't look like much (8000'ft per second/open breech) but man I have never seen so much electric being generated in one room to power it! They make the sabots it fires in the same bldg...with a range of up to 200 miles! I think the laser weapons are a bit of time away but the rail gun technology is on us now. Getting rid of these weapons, along with the A10 retirement is silliness IMO. I would work out some deal with Ukraine to sell them some of the Warthogs if we don't want them, and let Putin and his tank force think about 100 or so in the east. But with our weak, talk it to death leadership, will never happen. 0 -
Maybe Obamy wants to cancel just enough weapons programs so that our military won't stand a chance if the Nation is invaded. 0 -
Maybe it's so they have to be replaced by other systems that will show a tidy profit for the defense contractors. 0 -
They are both ancient technologies.
Put a neutron warhead on a tomahawk, and you've got a show stopper.
But a conventional warhead isn't impressive in this day and age. Too slow, and frankly they are susceptible to ground fire.
Bigger bang for the buck with an Air Force delivered JDAM.
And for a soviet tank commander, there are far scarier things in our inventory than an a10. Except the a10 will make you sweat while they poke holes in you. And the newer stuff makes holes before you know they are there.
I love the a10 platform. But it, like the tomahawk and hellfire (1982) are old technology.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
12 comments