Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

roblh.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 367 posts

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#141

Post by tonetegeatinst »

To be fair, while the barriers by manufacturing and engineering are no small thing people seem to forget that your average american can't male these.

They would need all kinds of license's and regular inspection from the BATFE and shit.

I was interested in doing some hobby and research chemistry sorta like a combination of the precision projects I see from

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8i-4EpLBXMzekETNXwcZjA

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC06HVrkOL33D5lLnCPjr6NQ

And more focused on the energetics stuff combines with just technology and research.

Well I did some digging and the ATF is regulated the industry to hell and back. And while I can recognise the importance of safety, I think that it also creates more additional barriers to entry. Especially considering this would a been a weekend hobby if it would have been possible.

TLDR: a lot of people talk about the logistics or the funds to start doing something like artillery production or silicon chip fabrication....and yes I agree but I think the regulation of everything has created so many barriers....you can't experiment in the backyard like you could in the 90's.

Were the 90's safe? No. But we also didn't know the real risks back then when it came to certain chemicals. Also, the growing population makes it more and more hard to have land where you can safely do things....in the north east coast its hard to find and long gun ranges, some states basically banned all the good fireworks, and all this regulation means having just more and more money to figure out how to navigate this issue....which means its not a hobby but a job.

I see plenty of cool things on YouTube from chemistry to engineering and part of me is not sure if the feds are just ignoring what these people do....because it dosnt seem legal, or if they are just lucky that they live somewhere with loosed regulations.

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#142

Post by actionfromafar »

JohnBooty wrote: post #106
nradov wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Towards the end of WW2 the US Navy got pretty good at anti-aircraft gunnery. The Japanese responded by sending their "guided missiles" (kamikazes) to attack in column formation. By the time the target ship shot down the attacking aircraft at the head of the column the others shielded behind it would be that much closer. Often the last one would get through to score a hit. The weapons are faster and more lethal now, b…

At this point, I think the burden of proof is on anybody who thinks a serious saturation attack on a carrier group (hundreds of missiles and/or decoys per wave, multiplied by multiple waves) from a peer adversary wouldn't work. If a conflict with Russia or China breaks out, I think the first thing that happens is aircraft carriers are going to immediately become obsoleted by antiship missiles as quickly as battleship…

I agree with the general threat, but an aircraft carrier can still project force at a distance, so a foe must strike from a great distance. It's doable but expensive. So not sure about how quickly carriers will be obsolete or ever really. Only a really advanced and large foe can threaten them.

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#143

Post by apapapa »

epistasis wrote: post #30
duped wrote: post #16

I don't think it's a "problem" that we don't have enough munitions to launch at other humans. It's a testament to our time that there aren't incentives for manufacturing death.

It's a huge problem when an army with a larger amount wants to take your land, abduct your children, kill anyone who speaks and writes in your language, and tortures all your leaders to death. All told, better to have fewer shells in general, but in particular, one must have at least as many shells as the murderous invaders that want to kill you. And towards that end, the more that Ukraine destroys Russia's military,…

Why the US supports Israel then if that's a problem?

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#144

Post by shiroiuma »

zmgsabst wrote: post #95
hash872 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but perhaps we could have negotiated a peace during a conference at Minsk a decade ago or in Feb 2022 at the outbreak of hostilities Ukraine negotiated nonstop with Russia from 2014 (when Russia first seized some of their territory) until literally 1 week before the invasion in 2022. It was 8 years of nonstop negotiations, brokered by France & Germany. I'm always amazed more people don't know about this. How did neg…

[flagged]

>ust ask Angela Merkel about their sincerity:

> In an interview published in Germany's Zeit magazine on Wednesday, former German chancellor Angela Merkel said that the Minsk agreements had been an attempt to "give Ukraine time" to build up its defences.

What's wrong with that? Obviously, you don't think anyone has a right to defend themselves against aggression from Russia.

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#145

Post by samus »

hugryhoop wrote: post #128
XorNot wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how to parse this comment. Why would the US give up on Taiwan "before it gets serious". If the US is involved in a shooting conflict in the Taiwanese strait, they either win or lose it conventionally but if it happens at all then nukes aren't getting involved unless mainland territorial invasions go on the table - and they're not going to. The reality is the US would very much like to avoid having to neg…

Taiwan could build it's own nukes in a few months if it wanted. Chinese preparations for an invasion would take more than that.

Even the attempt to make them again might provoke China to react. Eventually with an invasion, after slagging the facilities with cruise missiles or air bombardment. They will be committed to overwhelm any air defense to accomplish that.

What to do with them anyways? Taiwan would need plentiful supply of them and a reliable delivery mechanism. Japan surrendered because the US had total air superiority and bluffed about their supply of nukes. North Korea has long-range missiles and literally tens of thousands of artillery pieces aimed at Seoul.

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#147

Post by yywwbbn »

cameron_b wrote: post #62

It should probably be restated that instead of the conflict in Ukraine catching our production capacity off guard, that rather it was our production posture along with denuclearization and disarmament of Ukraine that set the stage for the conflict. I’m not a “team America world police” advocate, much more the opposite. Even as stated in the article, most production is more interested in a deterrent. Hate ‘em or hate…

Ukraine wasn’t real a nuclear power though. They some of Soviet arsenal and some facilities required to maintain but it would have required significant investment to make it actually usable longterm. That was totally unfeasible during the economic collapse of the early 90s

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#148

Post by maxglute »

JohnBooty wrote: post #106
nradov wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Towards the end of WW2 the US Navy got pretty good at anti-aircraft gunnery. The Japanese responded by sending their "guided missiles" (kamikazes) to attack in column formation. By the time the target ship shot down the attacking aircraft at the head of the column the others shielded behind it would be that much closer. Often the last one would get through to score a hit. The weapons are faster and more lethal now, b…

At this point, I think the burden of proof is on anybody who thinks a serious saturation attack on a carrier group (hundreds of missiles and/or decoys per wave, multiplied by multiple waves) from a peer adversary wouldn't work. If a conflict with Russia or China breaks out, I think the first thing that happens is aircraft carriers are going to immediately become obsoleted by antiship missiles as quickly as battleship…

Pretty much.

On paper US anti missile intercepts has been performing well in UKR and Red Sea, but consider the actual numbers. In UKR, 6 Kinzhals, alleged moving at shit tier mach ~3 speed end up damaging a patriot. In Red Sea, shit tier Houthi/Iranian cruise (subsonic) / ballistics, launched in even less coordinated salvos, realistically singles since description of multi missile attacks report these events unfold over matter of hours. Majority intercepted, but few still slip through to hit ships protected by flight IIA/III upgraded DDGs. IMO questionable how well a stacked CSG performs against high end AShMs (Teixeira leak allege US clocked PRC DF27 tests at mach 8+).

That's before considering replenishment fleet, of which US has only 11 fast supply class that can keep up with carrier groups, would also be targetted, leaving non nuclear CSG escorts single deployment assets with days of endurance in high tempo operations. And then what does the carrier do? Operate undefended? Said supply ships would almost be hard not to sink since they have to spend hours restocking in port, in theatre.

I think there's a good reason Navy isn't being recapitalized properly, and it's more than redtape. IMO people behind the scenes also sees the writing on the wall for large surface ships.

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#149

Post by yywwbbn »

lmm wrote: post #119
ComputerGuru wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, Israel has demonstrated much the same approach (confined to a much smaller territory) nonstop over the past four months (first missiles and now 155mm artillery and tank shells), so it’s definitely not just an Eastern Europe thing.

Many Israelis are from Eastern European backgrounds, and it's plausible that they may have inherited some military culture from there.

I’m not sure it has much to do with culture but almost everything with cost.

Missiles are extremely expensive and you’ll soon run out of them during a long war of attrition (especially in a symmetrical conflict like in Ukraine)

Re: As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production

#150

Post by hugryhoop »

samus wrote: post #145
hugryhoop wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taiwan could build it's own nukes in a few months if it wanted. Chinese preparations for an invasion would take more than that.

Even the attempt to make them again might provoke China to react. Eventually with an invasion, after slagging the facilities with cruise missiles or air bombardment. They will be committed to overwhelm any air defense to accomplish that. What to do with them anyways? Taiwan would need plentiful supply of them and a reliable delivery mechanism. Japan surrendered because the US had total air superiority and bluffed abo…

If Taiwan sees China assembling an invasion force, why not build a nuke then, China already signaled that it's going to attack anyway.

A nuke is easy to hide, we are not talking about global second strike capability here, just delivering a couple of them to close coastal cities, even by smuggling them in some civilian transport. Can China be 100% sure that not one slipped through? Taiwan could do a proof detonation on non-city Chinese soil if things get tense.

Post reply on HN