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

161–170 of 367 posts

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

#161

Post by triceratops »

golergka wrote: post #43
MilStdJunkie wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Over the last thirty years or so, it's been increasingly popular to see WW1 and WW2 as the same conflict, but with a pause for populations to stabilize and stocks to be rebuilt. It's sometimes called "The Second Thirty Years' War", although I feel that labelling is misleading, as is, potentially, the core thesis. Careful reading of the diplomatic history illustrates that WW2, despite our popular notions, was not enti…

> by the same intellectual framework that allowed them to dominate the rest of the world People consisted other nations and ethnicities subhuman as long as they existed. Europe was, AFAIK, the first place on Earth that (1) considered subjugated people equal before the law (if they converted), (2) banned slavery and (3) imposed slavery ban on other nations.

> considered subjugated people equal before the law (if they converted)

The Mongols and the ancient Persians didn't even make anyone convert.

> banned slavery

If you don't count all the colonies...

> imposed slavery ban on other nations

It is a very admirable thing to do, but who else could do it? They had the most powerful militaries in that era.

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

#162

Post by clarionbell »

dazed_confused wrote: post #58
c_o_n_v_e_x wrote: post #48

Rather than come up with a new manufacturing process for the existing munition design, why not develop a new munition (presumably with a new scalable process) that can be fired from existing weapons? No rounds seems like a worse condition than having equal-or-poorer performing rounds.

It’s not that the US doesn’t produce these weapons as much as Eastern Europeans approach to modern warfare is yeeting rounds 24/7.

That's just called war. People just haven't seen it in long while.

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

#163

Post by sbierwagen »

maxglute wrote: post #148
JohnBooty wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

>IMO people behind the scenes also sees the writing on the wall for large surface ships.

Considering this and Taiwan, it's funny that Congress isn't pushing for more SSGNs and accelerating the SSN(X) program.

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

#164

Post by fransje26 »

Animats wrote: post #83

The US government-owned facilities are not the only US source of 155mm rounds. NAMMO [1] is a major manufacturer, and they have a facility in Mesa, AZ. Here's their marketing video for 155mm rounds.[2] Nammo's management complains that they are being offered 3-4 year contracts, and they need 10-15 year contracts to build new factories. Peacetime demand for large-caliber ammo is very low, so when there's not a war on,…

> Israel is unhappy that the US stores of ammo in Israel are being sent to Ukraine

Yes, they have their own ground-leveling to do after all..

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

#165

Post by clarionbell »

Zetobal wrote: post #151
tehjoker wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am also against the Ukraine war and believe a peaceful settlement is possible. NATO (the US) is using Ukraine to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian, though having to fight two wars at once is causing them to rethink their position. ICJ did rule against Russia, and it makes sense since they invaded, but the roots of the conflict go back to attacks on Donetsk like you say since 2014 and various aggressive moves by NA…

gentleman's agreement... what a weird way to say there was no agreement.

Don't you know. Russians never mastered the art of written treaties. The Soviets were confused and thought that pinky swear (after all of the deception of cold war) is guarantee of future power sharing :D

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

#166

Post by hef19898 »

clarionbell wrote: post #153
BlueTemplar wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same as for : > My solace is that in a real conflict, all of that red tape would be put to the side and people can get about building things. That's just not going to happen. A real conflict would involve nukes, and the war would be quickly over. I doubt that something close to Vietnam can happen again either. (And even for a 2nd Vietnam, I doubt that any significant artillery would be used when, as you point out, mi…

People thought that war in Europe will be impossible. They were wrong. And now we are paying the price. Turns out large conventional war is very much a thing. Right now we have a big one in Europe, handful are brewing around the world. Artillery is still, and for many reasons will be, a king. Shells are order of magnitude cheaper than rockets. They are smaller. Easier to manufacture. Missiles are nice if you want to…

Europe didn't see war since WW2, regional, nasty conflicts in the Balkans and Eastern Europe not withstanding. Conventional, near-peer warfare, involving modern armies, wasn't a thing since Korea.

Things change, organizations and people adapt. Not foreseeing these changes is not a failure.

Believing that throwing predictions at the wall, and only picking the ones that stick in hindsight, is a viable strategy is just plane wrong so.

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

#167

Post by somenameforme »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #40
kspacewalk2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fine pacifist attitude to have when someone else did the fighting and the dying and the building up a military industrial complex for you. Ukrainians, for example, don't have that option, which is why a ton of IT guys there are starting and joining all sorts of miltech startups, volunteer groups, etc. Their families and their future depend on using their talents to build yucky weapons they don't want to be on the o…

Yeah, these pacifist-style comments are really tone deaf and out of touch. Yes, we'd all prefer peace and leaving each other alone, but if some other nation comes to kill your countrymen and replace your democracy with a puppet, suddenly just relying on pacifist ideals doesn't work well anymore. Most of the time, these commenters don't want to engage with reality as it currently exists. If you ask them what exactly y…

I agree that we should engage with reality as it currently exists. Davyd Arakhamia [1] is a Ukrainian member of parliament, in Zelensky's party. He was one of the negotiators early on with Russia. He stated that Russia's main demand was simply that Ukraine agree to not join NATO. Meduza has an article about it (which also links to the interview itself) here, as well as spin from various sides. [2] If you're unaware of the source Meduza is to Russia as MSNBC is to the Republican party. Here's his quote:

---

"They actually hoped until nearly the last moment that they could press us into signing this agreement, adopting neutrality. That was their biggest priority. They were willing to end the war if we took on neutrality, like Finland once did, and gave assurances that we wouldn’t join NATO. That was essentially the main point. Everything else was cosmetic and political embellishments about ‘denazification,’ the Russian-speaking population, blah blah blah"

---

He goes on to elaborate that the main reason they didn't agree to such is because (1) they didn't trust Russia and (2) Boris Johnson told them they should "just fight." And maybe Russia would have "really" invaded with the sort of logic you put forth in your post later on, but that was clearly not their goal in this invasion. Not joining NATO is hardly some Hitler level appeasement as our propaganda spins it.

Russia was paranoid about NATO, which has gradually been working to surround it with nuclear weapons, having a base setup in Ukraine which has a geographically clear path straight into Russia's heartland. And I don't find such paranoia particularly unreasonable. Countries that strongly turn against America tend to find death and destruction at their doorstep soon enough.

And none of this is to justify Russia's invasion, nor condemn Ukraine's decision to fight. Rather I emphasize that we live in a world that's a million shades of gray, even if propaganda from one side or the other invariably frame it as the clearest thing ever. And enough people will believe such unquestionably, ensuring war will be with us til our final days.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davyd_Arakhamia

[1] - https://meduza.io/en/feature/2023/11/28/we-had-to-buy-time

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

#168

Post by hugryhoop »

maxglute wrote: post #155
hugryhoop wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

It's open secret ROCA is thoroughly infiltrated by PRC intelligence, and Chinese missiles can hit anywhere in TW in 7 minutes. If anything, if PRC wants to unilaterally attack TW, you would expect PRC to manufacture casus belli that TW is pursuing nuclear program to preemptively strike TW before they even start assembling an invasion force. Most of the world would be left shrugging because nuclear proliferation of no…

Taiwan has underground facilities from it's previous attempt at building nuclear weapons.

Even after a Chinese decimation attack, if the invasion force is not immediatly ready Taiwan will still have enough time to build the nukes.

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

#169

Post by hef19898 »

jncfhnb wrote: post #127
lmm wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 10,000 shells can be displaced by 100 missiles. That might still be a bad tradeoff given that these 155mm shells are apparently $8,000 each, whereas a Storm Shadow is apparently $3,200,000 a pop.

You’re not hitting the same targets with a storm shadow

Plus, leveling the target area with dumb shells is not necessarily working, exhibit A the Western Front in WW1. And if said target area is a city, the leveling is kind of frowned upon nowadays (depending of course on who is levelling and who is being levelled).

The alternative is guided artillery shells. And those are damn expensive.

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

#170

Post by hef19898 »

StillBored wrote: post #91
Spooky23 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rationale is that the ordnance on target ratio is way higher with missiles. 10,000 shells can be displaced by 100 missiles. A conflict like Russia/Ukraine isn’t happening with the US. A US / Russia conflict would have resulted in US air supremacy or a nuclear exchange.

The Russians apparently have 600 tanks queued up right now for an advance. And while apparently they don't use the tanks as mobile guns for their infantry there is probably a good number in support of those tanks, and it seems unlikely one would fire missiles at infantry. Which is why we were dumping 50 year old stockpiles of dumb bombs in Afganistan. Which leads to the question of how one maintains air superiority f…

Manpads: flying at high altitudes. AA: flying low.

But anyway, the golden bullet solutions is drones. /s

Post reply on HN