$23 billion for big guns and no ammo - Mount some Glocks or P320s?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

If it makes us feel better, The German Navy has stuck itself with new crappy ships. https://www.wsj.com/articles/german-...s&page=1&pos=1

It's behind their pay wall. However, it's not on the newsfeed on my phone. Huh?

About the comments - it's interesting to watch fanboy debates in other genre. We have AIWB, Glock love hate, the old 9 vs 45.

There is a a Zumwalt fan boy that says all will be well when they put ray guns and rail guns on the ship! Wow. He likes the idea of the ship getting in close to use its guns (if they ever work). Everything I read nowadays says getting a ship close in is a losing proposition. It's stealthy appearance means crap when you are 80 miles off shore. Some guy in a fishing boat will see you.

[ranger]

I think a challenge for the Navy is now what is their "mission" that drives their "strategy" which then drives their "weapon systems" to nest with the strategy/mission. From an Infantry guy perspective; since the Cold War ended, the US Navy has been used to project power (aka threaten) our adversaries most of which do not have a navy of any sort or certainly not a "peer" navy. Therefore, the Navy has been seeking ways to be relevant in an era of "low intensity" conflict with Al Qaeda, ISIS, etc. Now our security strategy starts emphasizing Chinese and Russian threats which are the "peer" navy threats we did not resource the Navy to fight since the end of the Cold War.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I've been reading a series of military techno thrillers by Joe Poyer about a war with China. So far it has not gone well for us. The navy has been brutalized by the area denial strategies of the Chinese. One thing in books is that after a battle, ships go 'winchester' - out of ammo and missiles. However, they cannot be refilled at sea with missiles. If this is correct, who thought of that? You have to sail hundreds to thousands of miles to rearm.

Also, existing stocks are so low. You read about purchases of weapons in the hundreds. I read, if true, that in the Falklands war, the UK used up almost its entire stock of antisubmarine weapons search for some Argentine diesels that they never found.

Can we really contest in the South China area without a WW II mobilization? Unlikely. It is not like WWII where escort carriers, P-51s, Shermans and Liberty ships can roll out of the plants.

[ranger]

As I remember it, when Europe decided to punish Libya, we told them we were busy with Iraq and Afghanistan. Again, as I recall, the European militaries figured out quick that they did not have enough ordnance or the right mix of attack-jammer-support air frames and - as usual - the US had to get involved.

I spent a lot of time doing "battlefield calculus" with basic loads for M1s and M2 BFVs on how long we could stay engaged before running out of main gun ammo, TOWs, etc. not to mention the decision points on when to refuel.

Classic military quote paraphrased - amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.

[Joe in PNG]

My personal observation on war, and probably nothing new- Communications are the key to tactics; Logistics are the key to strategy.

Our military appropriations are such a mess because our politicians are under the simultaneous pressure to both cut defense spending, while maximizing the amount of defense spending done in their district.
Thus, what we have is less a means to equip our troops as it is a method to pass around as much pork as possible.

And if they ever make "Pentagon Wars II", this would be a good subject.