Re: [Official!] Project Horizons Comment Crew Chat thread.

[Frost]

The United States has an economy in which the military is very important as well. Part of the reason, AFAIK, that the military hasn't downsized very significantly in a while.

Which is a shame, because I could talk your ear off about how we could trim the fat from the military without actually lessening its strength.

[Harmony Ltd.]

These fucking contractors.

It never cease to amaze me how much money the US is able to blow on shit no one cares about apart from the senators / representative who are going to benefit from the contract one way or another.


And those fucking R&D clusterfucks.

The Bradley. The F-35. There's a point where you needed to stop with that F-35, and you clearly passed it. Now you're stuck with that POS for at least the twenty or thirty years to come.

[Ketchup]

The United States has an economy in which the military is very important as well. Part of the reason, AFAIK, that the military hasn't downsized very significantly in a while.

Which is a shame, because I could talk your ear off about how we could trim the fat from the military without actually lessening its strength.

I think the US have so many toys that cost ridiculous amounts of money but do the job of something cheaper 1.1 times better. The amount of people working on ways to kill people, or protect other people from being killed in the US is huge. Also, inefficiencies in all sorts of systems that I don't know much about.

To continue the fat metaphor, they get fed too much.

I'd actually like to hear that rant, actually.

These fucking contractors.

It never cease to amaze me how much money the US is able to blow on shit no one cares about apart from the senators / representative who are going to benefit from the contract one way or another.


And those fucking R&D clusterfucks.

The Bradley. The F-35. There's a point where you needed to stop with that F-35, and you clearly passed it. Now you're stuck with that POS for at least the twenty or thirty years to come.

Yes. People getting paid to waste the government's time.

[Scyto Harmony]

The Bradley. The F-35. There's a point where you needed to stop with that F-35, and you clearly passed it. Now you're stuck with that POS for at least the twenty or thirty years to come.

Could be worse. I could be butchering this story because I'm going by memory, But the Canadian government also paid a ridiculous amount for F-35's that we're never going to use. What makes it a could be worse? We didn't buy them with the engines.

Again, this was a while ago so I don't remember much, but it was something like super expensive for the jets, and like, double that for the engines.

[Moodyman90]

Oddly enough I haven't heard about anything from China about all of this.
Did some digging and other than how Obama had to cancel going to the first Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum and comments on how "the US defaulting would hurt everybody", nothing.



But I know one way to free up some funds. Obviously not enough to fix all the problems, but maybe cut the salary of those in office in half, make them use the same healthcare that everybody else does, cut the money they get when they get out of office in half.

[Harmony Ltd.]

As long as they don't call themselves 'The United ____ of Europe.'. Because then we'd have 2 major countries in the world without a real fucking name. United States of America is not a name, it's a description.

If anything, we'll just continue to call ourselves the European Union most probably.

But I doubt it'll happen anytime soon.

Don't get me wrong : I dream of being able to see an European Federation in my living time, but the prospects really don't look good on that front.

The European Union, as a political entity, is currently clinically dead as far as I can tell. The Triad (Germany, France, UK) have wildly divergent interests on a wide range of issue (economic, diplomatic, military, etc...), and none of them is willing to surrender its sovereignty on these topics if it means that they won't be getting their ways.


But even then, the problem of a Federalized Europe would be that, without sugar-coating it, we're just too different from each other. There are currently 28 member countries in the European Union, with wildly different economies, requiring differing fiscal policies for each to stay competitive (read : for money to keep going in instead of out), and that any sort of one-size-fits-all solution in this area is doomed to crash and burn horribly.


To help nothing, the European union in its present form is a Technocracy, the common people having little to no say in the governing process of the Union. There's a parliament, but from what I get it often get told to stay silent in the corner while the adults talk.

[Frost]

I'd actually like to hear that rant, actually.

It's a lot like Harmony said, really--culture in general, but especially the politicians who really pull the military's puppet/purse strings are obsessed with the idea of bleeding-edge technology. Rather than, say, stick to a solid workhorse vehicle and keep a smaller number of niche equipment around, they're always blowing millions on R&D (I initially typed D&D. I'm not sure how you could spend millions on a game of D&D unless you were hiring Peter Jackson to direct it and breeding your own dragons and orcs for it) that could be better spent on training personnel, modernizing back-logged equipment, ect. History and just basic logic tell us one thing--as long as you have solid communication and logistics, you'll win over the guys who have the biggest boom. We don't need a fleet of B2 bombers that cost more than fucking space shuttles (I've not checked the numbers in a while, but I don't think that's much of an exaggeration) when we have tons of modular, solid and easily-modernized bombers. We don't need the latest-and-greatest fighter jet so long as the pilot's well-trained and the plane is running. Not to mention hardly anything is recycled--there really are "boneyards" full of completely discarded aircraft, still full of recyclable and usable material. 

In short--Standardize, modernize, and build according to needs, not "this new thingy is shiny". It's more an issue for the vehicles, because, comparatively speaking, dumb grunts like myself cost a pittance no matter how much you indulge.

[Harmony Ltd.]

But even then, the problem of a Federalized Europe would be that, without sugar-coating it, we're just too different from each other. There are currently 28 member countries in the European Union, with wildly different economies, requiring differing fiscal policies for each to stay competitive (read : for money to keep going in instead of out), and that any sort of one-size-fits-all solution in this area is doomed to crash and burn horribly.

(which is, by the way, the exact thing that is currently happening with the Euro crisis)

[Moodyman90]

GOD! DAMN IT! CNN! Why in the hell are ya'll covering Samsung unveiling the Galaxy with rounded edges?

[cb5]

There is one thing we should be thankful for is that the republican party next year after the midterms is going to be the extinct party with how badly their approval rating is plummeting.  Then maybe shit can get done.

GOD! DAMN IT! CNN! Why in the hell are ya'll covering Samsung unveiling the Galaxy with rounded edges?

Cause 24/7 news has a terminal case of stupidity.

[Ketchup]

snip

Indeed, logistics and the capacity to actually field an army is more important than having the newest gear(M2 Brownings are still doing what they were built to do, and the design is 95 years old). The US has an excellent logistic capacity, but it can't really support a full-scale war without modifications. Unless you guys wanted to invade Canada, that'd be easy because it's just a walk North.

The boneyards are apparently for future conflicts or something silly like that. They can't afford to just put all that crap back into service when war comes calling. Better to just scrap it or, better yet, sell it.

And yes, it'd be very difficult to spent millions on a game of D&D. 

[Frost]

snip

Indeed, logistics and the capacity to actually field an army is more important than having the newest gear(M2 Brownings are still doing what they were built to do, and the design is 95 years old). The US has an excellent logistic capacity, but it can't really support a full-scale war without modifications. Unless you guys wanted to invade Canada, that'd be easy because it's just a walk North.

The boneyards are apparently for future conflicts or something silly like that. They can't afford to just put all that crap back into service when war comes calling. Better to just scrap it or, better yet, sell it.

And yes, it'd be very difficult to spent millions on a game of D&D. 

The current military needs to take notes from the military of WWII: keep things, relatively speaking, simple and less expensive, easy to produce in large numbers. I won't pretend to know enough about armored vehicles or aeronautics to talk at length on the subject, but many examples speak for themselves--the "Warthog", for instance, is godlike when it comes to ground-support, being able to fly with half the airframe blown out and principally delivering death not through comparatively expensive missiles or bombs, but good ol' explosive rounds shot from a big damn gun. Traditional artillery, likewise, lets you rain death on an enemy position from miles away for a fraction of the cost of airstrikes and cruise missiles (such is the advantage of lobbing boom-boom at a target rather than trying to fly an explosive computer at them). 

Snipers are likewise in high demand nowadays because they area massive force-multiplier for a military presence in the area while being cheaper than any armored vehicle or attack chopper--at the end of the day, they're guys with rifles and PDA's that blow your head up with math.

[Harmony Ltd.]

@ Frost : to be fair, the pressure the US military has is that since, pfft, I don't know when, there's been more and more pressure put on the institution to limit as much as possible casualties and death of military personnel in operation.

This driving concept has led us to absurd things like the GCV, an Armoured Personnel Carrier that weighs more than 80 metric tons, almost thirty tons more than an Abrams, the majority of it being armor.

Or you can see the strategic effect, as the US is less and less keen on sending actual boots on the ground, leading to the rise of the Drones as the current, "be-all end-all" of military hardware. Which in turn shapes the global US strategy (not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but it's a fact).



Then you get into the silly stuff like the DDG-1000 Zumwalt, literally a modern Battleship, but stealthy, built to be fitted with the Naval Railgun once the technology becomes mature enough ; and so bleeding edge that almost everything in it is new and needs to be debugged on its own and in coordination with the other systems, incurring more cost overruns and project delays that you can imagine.

[Frost]

@ Frost : to be fair, the pressure the US military has is that since, pfft, I don't know when, there's been more and more pressure put on the institution to limit as much as possible casualties and death of military personnel in operation.

Here's a freebie for anyone who wants to run a military operation and minimize deaths--Proper intel/scouting, caution, coordination and situational awareness. Train the individual soldiers better, give them the equipment they need to stay connected and up-to-the-minute on the situation, and be liberal in dealing with anything threatening. 

It's not just military, it's a universal truth--don't brute force your way through problems that could be solved with a bit of finesse. Don't kick down a door when you can unlock it, don't use a clawhammer when a chisel will do, don't start a bonfire when a candle is needed--the metaphors go on and on.

[cb5]

@ Frost : to be fair, the pressure the US military has is that since, pfft, I don't know when, there's been more and more pressure put on the institution to limit as much as possible casualties and death of military personnel in operation.

Here's a freebie for anyone who wants to run a military operation and minimize deaths--Proper intel/scouting, caution, coordination and situational awareness. Train the individual soldiers better, give them the equipment they need to stay connected and up-to-the-minute on the situation, and be liberal in dealing with anything threatening. 

It's not just military, it's a universal truth--don't brute force your way through problems that could be solved with a bit of finesse. Don't kick down a door when you can unlock it, don't use a clawhammer when a chisel will do, don't start a bonfire when a candle is needed--the metaphors go on and on.

Don't use a cruise missile in a crowded neighborhood when a specops team is needed.

[Harmony Ltd.]

But anyway, If I were to have a say in the US military "grand strategy", I'd be a proponent of strengthening the Navy in its role of police of the world's maritime trade lines and first vector of US power projection ; cut the fat from the airforce and severely downsizing the orders for F-35 planes (as few as possible while not compromising the investment of the other countries having participated in the project), replaced by (for example) modernized versions of the F/A-18, and new orders of F-22 if necessary to fill the air-superiority role if it were needed ; downsize both the US Army and the Marines. The National Guard IIRC is the responsibility of the individual States, so it isn't really a matter ofdiscussion.

The Coast Guard, of course, is not to be fucked with.

[Frost]

But anyway, If I were to have a say in the US military "grand strategy", I'd be a proponent of strengthening the Navy in its role of police of the world's maritime trade lines and first vector of US power projection ; cut the fat from the airforce and severely downsizing the orders for F-35 planes (as few as possible while not compromising the investment of the other countries having participated in the project), replaced by (for example) modernized versions of the F/A-18, and new orders of F-22 if necessary to fill the air-superiority role if it were needed ; downsize both the US Army and the Marines. The National Guard IIRC is the responsibility of the individual States, so it isn't really a matter ofdiscussion.

The Coast Guard, of course, is not to be fucked with.

You're the local expert on aviation, I think, so I'll take your word on the planes.

Honestly, the Army and Marines are completely redundant, but neither side's "proud history" will let them admit that just fusing them into a unified combined-arms ground-fighting branch would be a pretty damn smart use of resources.

As I've alluded to, use of force-multipliers like special forces and snipers is better than just throwing brute force at the problem. That's why I'm keeping my eyes and ears open for any possibilities of joining up with, say, an airborne or light infantry unit (I've no illusions of being able to make it in SF myself, at least not in my current state)

[Moodyman90]

To show how much I actually pay attention, I still thought that the F-22 were still the new shit and didn't even know about the F-35.

The fuck are they for? Shooting down the aliens spaceships when they come? Or was the military so ashamed that Micheal Bay used the 22s in the Transformers movies and wanted to move on as fast as they could?

[O. Hinds]

And to top it all off, my vote doesn't mean shit since I don't have a voting representative.

Could be worse. In the last presidential election, our wonderful "democratic" system counted me as a point for Romney/Ryan just because of where I lived.

Also, in the class I just came from, there was, just before class started, a student commenting that, actually, the shutdown was a good thing, since the government just pushes things to instability. I'm rather glad that class started then, as I don't know where one would even start attacking that.

[Harmony Ltd.]

You're the local expert on aviation, I think, so I'll take your word on the planes.

I wouldn't if I were you. :v

But to be more precise :

- Transport plane & aerial refueling planes : the US needs as much of them as it can get its dirty hands on, due to the fact it's fucking everywhere on that goddamn planet, and that shit won't ship itself to the battlefield. Carte Blanche as far as expanding the capacity there goes.
- Intelligence & Electronic warfare planes : as a rule of thumb, the US needs more intelligence, not less, so I say if you can manage to use the money you save elsewhere to increase the already massive superiority the US has in that domain, that could be a very good force multiplier to fit in the Grand Strategy.
- Fighter planes : The US has (IIRC) currently more than 2,500-3,000 fighter planes of all kinds in service between all branches of the armed forces (do the National Guard(s) really need to have their own airforces ?...). This is like twice or thrice more than all of the european airforces combined, transport and utility planes included. I think it is a relatively reasonable assessment that the US doesn't need to maintain so many of these planes in active service. The oldest ones could probably be mothballed without too much trouble for the whole US strategy to still work.
- Strategic Bombers : The B-52 can't be produced anymore as the necessary tooling has been scrapped decades ago. The B-2 is horrendously expensive, but there's already, like, only 10-15 of them in service. That leaves the B-1B, which isn't bad, but costs a shitload of money to fly when it does fly. But even then, I'm not sure how often the US does use these bombers. They sure are useful when comes the time to declare war to Iraq, Iran, or any enemy with significant armed forces in need of carpet bombing. I'd say that a part of the budget that although may not see much use, needs to be kept.


If you really want to start saving money on the Airforce, though, think about all these airbases you have around the world, and have a look at how much it costs you to keep them online.

[Harmony Ltd.]

To show how much I actually pay attention, I still thought that the F-22 were still the new shit and didn't even know about the F-35.

The fuck are they for? Shooting down the aliens spaceships when they come? Or was the military so ashamed that Micheal Bay used the 22s in the Transformers movies and wanted to move on as fast as they could?

They wanted a F-22-lite that could be the workhorse of the Air Force, the Navy and the Marines as far as multirole fighters go - thus the name of the program : Joint Strike Fighter.

Most of the money went on making the plane as stealthy as they could make it. Note that I didn't use the term "reasonably".

Thus, the problem is that in the process of pursuing that goal they stripped the plane of most of its armament, and it only has a single engine instead of two like almost all other modern fighter planes.

 

[Frost]

So, in practical terms, it's much like I've been saying--focus on intelligence and logistics rather than brute force (partly because the only gap in the fence on that front is strategic bombers, which have rather heavily fallen out of favor nowadays)

[brony all alone]

stealth is the best option for anything. especially where without it its life threatening. stealth can do what an all out firefight can do, only quicker, more efficent,silent,and less US ammo and soldiers wasted,and possibly less people needed.(POSSIBLY). example: country a has to eliminate all of country b,s soldiers in a radio facility and shut off the radio before B can call backup. option 1: send 1 or 2 trained stealth men to quietly take out the enemies guarding the tower and disconnect it. after send some more guys in to clean up the mess. option 2: full on assault,B has time to call in reinforcements when 1st shots fired. those reinforcements can depend on th necessity of holding the area. so possibly enemy helos and alot of reinforcements. so stealth is key. being sneaky sure saved my ass a few times.

-------

https://cloudsville.rpg-board.net/viewtopic.forum?t=1095

[Sponsored content]