Chestnut
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2019
- Messages
- 704
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Don't you know? If the the US DoD doesn't spend ALL of its budget, they risk having the next year's budget being reduced.
Jokes aside, never understood why the US Army is so adamant about it. A lot of think tanks and defense observers agree that the MPF is a Department of Defense procurement cash cow; a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. For the most part, there isn't really anything it can do that the Abrams, Bradley, Stryker Dragoon, MGS, or a Carl Gustav/AT4 can't do. The argument is that they are going to use it for near-pear enemies, but the reality is that it's already woefully outgunned then the buying it in the first place is already ridiculous. And if it's for enemies that don't organic armor assets or their own, then it's even more ridiculous. Iraq and Afghanistan has shown that Infantry with precision munitions + GPS guided artillery shells can flatten out bunkers and heavily entrenched city blocks without risking a vehicle be de-tracked. The incoming service of infantry-based loitering munitions is also going to make these things obsolete real quick.
Also for the Carl Gustav part, you guys should check out what a Carl Gustav HEAT round can do to bunkers. Really puts a lot of FSV's to shame.
Just hope the Air Force fully integrates it with the Oerlikons and GCI radars to create a real IADS. I am fully in the "Literally just give the Air Force either the SAMP/T or the Patriot because unlike the Army they actually know and understand the value of data-linking and networking all of their assets together to form a cohesive defense against a potential adversary" camp.View attachment 626775 View attachment 626776 View attachment 626777 View attachment 626778
Credit to Fb page Lightning II Chan