In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
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.
Comments
the outrage from the Joint Chiefs of Staff?
being of their country.
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.
Brad Steele
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.
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.[:)]
Brad Steele
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.