There was an apparently serious proposal some time ago to use A-10s as hurricane chasers. However, that mission is already well-handled by C-130s, and the A-10 doesn't really have the payload capacity for the sensors and technicians needed.
USA Military News
- Thread starter PsihoKekec
- Start date
There was an apparently serious proposal some time ago to use A-10s as hurricane chasers. However, that mission is already well-handled by C-130s, and the A-10 doesn't really have the payload capacity for the sensors and technicians needed.
You know...the A10 would make an amazing crop duster
Buba
A total creep
Hmmm, it DOES look somewhat similar to Poland's greatest contribution to agriplane development:
PZL M-15 Belphegor - Wikipedia
Did they just put big storage tanks between the wings?Hmmm, it DOES look somewhat similar to Poland's greatest contribution to agriplane development:
PZL M-15 Belphegor - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
And this is how Elon will destroy our country.
Don't let him touch defense in deciding what we can and can't build.
He will cause us to lose th next war, because he thinks preprogrammed drone show swarms are what are going to be and are being used in combat, not knowing how ineffective that ahit is.
Watch, when DOGE goes to the DoD expect all air craft to be scrapped including NGAD. He is going to keep the army in Vietnam era equipment.
...except, that's not at all what his tweet says, an instead is pointing out that a few high end systems are not enough to win a war, and that we need quantity of effective systems, even if they aren't top end, not just small numbers of high end systems.
Also, he points out the US is still trying to make due with equipment from the 'last war', which implies we need to start prioritizing newer equipment for the next war.
This is something others have pointed out too, and is not a new issue, going all the way back to the DoD rejecting the F-20 Tigershark because everyone at the time didn't think we needed numbers, just tech, to win the next war.
The DoD procurement process is rather fucked as it is, and it only takes a few Perun video covering the difficulties in 'normal' procurement cycles to see the point Musk is trying to make.
Except we stay on top by doing exactly what we do. We never stopped making small high end, because it guranteed the dominance of the 22.
And Elon himself said we should get rid of the 35 and replace it with drone swarms.
Mark my words when DOGE hits the DoD we will be worse off than better off.
F-35's do have the ability to be optionally manned, from what I've heard, so maybe we'll just end up with tons of F-35's becoming drones.
Also, small numbers of high end things leave us vulnerable to freak weather events fucking over the training/logistics chains, like the hurricane that wiped out all the 2 seat training F-22's, and effectively ended the plane's long term prospects even as much as NGAD did.
And I think that what Musk is also talking about is aiming for a high-low mix, not just depending on small numbers of high tech units to win us the wars of tomorrow, but also having lower tech but more numerous units that can be attritided without losing massively expensive pieces of equipment we cannot replace.
And staying on top is easier when you have something backing up the highest end shit that is less expensive and more expendable.
Elon himself has said he does not see the purpose for manned aircraft anymore.
Given that we have been creating 'loyal wingman' drones for our manned fighters, uncrewed vessels for our navy, and even tons of new drones for ground forces...maybe Elon is just saying the quiet part out loud about the future of warfare, where there are more drones than manned platforms or units on the field.
Reducing the crewing requirements of many types of craft, be it ships, planes, and ground vehicles has been an ongoing thing for decades, and the drones are able to even take the place of infantry in many areas, as the Russian invasion of Ukraine is showing.
I think you are just suffering from Elon Derangement Syndrome, and wanting to ignore the points he's making and evidence for them, mostly because you are a grunt and the Army has a phobia of unmanned systems replacing their groundpounders, much like the battleship captains had a phobia of the carriers taking away their significance.
Except no, as we see in Ukraine drones are only part of the battlefield. Infantry are VITAL for any war.
You can't win a LACO war with only drones. If you could the war in Ukraine would be over.
The thing about all those drones? They arnt drone swarms, they are large drones to small independent single units.
Because that is how wars will be fought.
But in the end without infantry you will lose any and every war
This ignores that drones and drone swarms are already massively invested in with all branches. What Ukraine has shown is how much can be done with drones, not just as swarms, but improvised and specialized types, and it even brought the humble stick into combat as an anti-drone weapon, both for humans and other drones (stick in the props tends to wreck a lot of drones) so we may have literal drone jousting matches in the near future, or even current times
No one is saying there will be no infantry in the future, but the fact is drones are cheaper to replace than humans, and with birth rates having been low, and recruiting rates low for a while...drones will make up more and more of the mass of the military as time goes by.
There will always be humans in the mix, but that mix is going to be more and more drone heavy as time goes forward, not less drone heavy.
Both sides have a point. Is the US military procurement system horribly slow and cost inefficient?
Yes. Zach will admit it too.
Is replacing everything with drones the best, or even a decent answer to the abovementioned problem?
Hell no.
Most drones are, as they are capable now, more munitions/decoys than platforms. You can't replace destroyers and carriers with them any more than you can do it with very fancy long range cruise missiles. They couldn't do most of the things they are needed to do. The famous Ukrainian drones are just a clever hybrid of a jetski and a long range radio controlled torpedo in principle.
Just wait for proper semi-autonomous smart torpedoes, that shit will be losing millions of hours of sleep for naval officers worldwide.
And in Ukraine you can easily notice that drones are used as support for *a lot* of infantry. If you insist the capabilities provided may reduce the need for infantry numbers by few percent. Maybe even 20-30% if you *really* pushed the limits of what is technologically and tactically feasible, though that may no longer be so cheap at all. But no more, as things stand. Maybe once Musk has his first terminator-like prototype showing off on US army testing grounds and scaring the shit out of infantry grunts by doing their job better than they could we can raise those numbers.
But let's wait with acting on that assumption until it actually takes the metal form of a moving and shooting killbot, ok?
Last edited:
You mean how we still require heavy infantry as seen in Ukraine....
And sticks are useless against FPVs and other stick drones are only due to the slow pace of the combat
Ukraine has shown us that slow world war 1 style combat works wonders with drones
Not anytime soon.
I mean, yes and no. Eventually drones will lead us to having more infantry making up for the fact we have so many drones we have to be able to hold the land they take, which means abundance of infantry to male sure drones don't kill them quickly.
Mine won't, military needs it's intel more then ever
Buba
A total creep
Naaa, Zach can be requalified as drone operator. Unlike many grunts ...
Yeah until someone invents actual Terminator style androids with advanced artificial intelligence or something, there's going to be need for tens of thousands of living troops in military service.