I know our small arms are among the best in the world but how does our other tech compare? Such as tanks, jets, missles, ect.
I don’t think that our small arms are so much the “best” as the most universally acceptable.
Tanks/jets/missiles…
Yeah, better than most, but more to the point; we have them in quantity with a good supply chain and training programs.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
I agree about maybe not having the bet small arms as quantifying the best can be tough as everything is a balance of tradeoffs.
I was curious due to the all the rising tensions throughout the world just how well our technology would do when facing countries that actually have strong military forces vs what we have been fighting the past 10 years.
What makes us the best is training. Tech is among the best, and raw spending power is also by far the most. We have a firm grasp of logistics and the tools to implement it. We have multiple carrier groups, most nations struggle to keep up one carrier. We have the best strategic bombers and air superiority aircraft in the world for now. Our small arms are pretty good, but not the “best.”
In conventional war, small arms don’t kill as much as arty and close air support. Actually I think that holds true in Afghanistan too.
So what matters the most? Boomers, carrier battle groups, and C-17s. And training. And Intel (NRO, CIA, NSA, etc.)
We can “git thar fustest with the mostest” and we know how to use it when we do.
What I’ve always been weary of concerning modern combat is production capability, not necessarily tech.
In WWII we could produce a Sherman tank every 30 minutes. A new P51 or P47 rolled off the line every hour.
Yeah, we currently have a lot of Abrahams and jets, but somehow I don’t think we can rapidly produce them anymore because of their intricacy. If we were in a global conventional war with China or Russia, we’d HAVE to be making new tanks, planes, and ships. I just question out ability to do so rapidly like we could in the past.
So which of our small arms could really use an upgrade and which countries are superior in that aspect?
I do agree our amount of carriers is impressive and as always I appreciate the information everyone has in these subjects.
I would opine that the large amount of foreign sourced equipment in our inventories suggests that many, if not most of our European allies are equal to us in quality and capability.
Yes, the gap is uncomfortably closing.
That is a good point. I do wish we would get back to more US made stuff and stay ahead of the pack.
We use foreign designed (but US produced) weapons like the m240/9 because they’re good weapons. We could use only domestically designed gear, but we’d be crippling ourselves. Staying ahead of the pack and cutting off the innovation from the rest of the world are mutually defeating goals.
.jpg)
I could go on for days.
Well that is a very good point that I did not think of. Its like alot of countries and armys use our M4A1. I do feel a joint ally system works in favor of all the countries that work together.
Have other countries adopted some of the upgrades we have made to the 240/9 or is that strictly a US thing?
While we are on the topic of small arms what weapons could we improve that would give us some of the best i we do no have them? I know the Beretta M9 is one that could def use a few upgrades like a Glock, or even just a gen 3 locking block.
Training is what makes us the best.
No we don’t have the capacity we did in WW2, and we didn’t in 1940, either. That’s why women went to work, there was rationing, and everyone retooled for war needs.
If we had to do the same thing again we could easily outpace WW2 production. We are also much better prepared now. Back then the idea was to have a skeleton crew and then use the draft. They didn’t learn, either, by the time Korea came around, and people were being shipped over there with less than 2 weeks of total military training. Now we have a full time professional military that can handle almost everything, and the tech has come around where we can lay down more hurt on people with far fewer people. A draft situation is likely only to come around if the mainland was seriously in danger of enemy landings, and the couple million people in the current military were somehow in danger of not being able to repel some imaginary Red Dawn type force with cargo planes that can somehow sneak around in mass formations without no one noticing.
That said I’ve read the swedish subs are EXTREMELY nasty to detect but luckily they are westerners. IMO our biggest threat is cyber or some state/AQ/terrorist sponsored sneaking in of a nuke along the SW border or a port.
I don’t know of every wordwide munition, but the muns we have in our inventory coupled with the support equipment and maintenance knowledge, have given us a new dimension when it comes to putting warheads on foreheads.
That is funny, true and badass.
Belmont, I think these things above may work more against us than for us today. I’d call it weakness. Yeah, after 9-11 everyone was waving flags and a few joined the military, but I have grave doubts about the stomach of our nation and its collective ability, or even will, to sacrifice for the effort. Rationing fuel, rubber, or any of the other commodities we’ve rationed historically…well, I find it hard to believe our culture today would even be able to grasp the reasoning, much less get behind the cause.
I pray I am wrong. For real.
Im not an expert but from the news and whatnot I think I am more concered with cyber attacks than a conventional war. It could just be my ignorance however.
Yes some things would be different but we’ve never had to go through what was basically a nationalization of every asset so we don’t have that perspective.
I’m just saying, with the capacity we have now, we could dwarf WW2 production numbers. You have to think back then there was no CNC, no computers, no CAD, ect. You also have to remember patents and that type of shit goes out with the window. You have 5+ companies making M4’s with gov money and we could easily produce them. It would just be General Dynamics making tanks. Now we have CAT, John Deere, the big rig companies, ect.
No we are not as tough as we were but we have the technology to make up for that, the US has a ton of natural resources, and if theres no 2015 or 2016 Ford’s well then that’s how it is. Now we can make far more advanced stuff than in the 40’s with far fewer people.
But no…it would not be the same but if we wanted to we could make WW2 look like nothing when it comes to production.
And kmstrn please edit that HUGE picture. It messes the whole thread up when you can’t even see the entire picture with a 24" monitor.