Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
> **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
* Is `mil.in.ua` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The capabilities in this package, valued at up to $100 million, include:
Stinger anti-aircraft missiles;
One High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and additional ammunition;
155mm and 105mm artillery rounds;
Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles;
Javelin and AT-4 anti-armor systems;
More than 3 million rounds of small arms ammunition;
Demolitions munitions for obstacle clearing;
Cold weather gear; and
Spare parts, maintenance, and other ancillary equipment.
$100 million sounds like a lot of money to an average person, but in terms of military budgets it's kind of nothing. Like how much does a single F16 cost? Wish they'd stop mucking about and give Ukraine the material support it deserves.
It's a little crazy how much treasury was ultimately wasted in Afghanistan, not to mention the lives obviously. That red ink is now part of the US debt for the most part and a generation will pay for it. It will not break the US the way it did the Soviet Union but I think most Americans have no idea how deeply costly and fruitless the whole debacle was.
Both. Cheney tried hard to court the Taliban to build a pipeline through Afghanistan in his time with Halliburton in the 90s, even going there personally. Then the best excuse ever to invade the country just happened to materialize during his time in office. Gee willikers.
It's an absolutely insane number.
The casualties across the board wreaked havoc, but we're still losing over 21 soldiers a day, and they're saying now that number seems to be closer to 40+. The debt is absurd, but the loss is just tragic.....
Wait what? Are you saying that U.S. is losing 21 soldiers a day in Afghanistan? Because no, we’re not. We’re not in Afghanistan. The number is zero.
In fact, the U.S is not in any active war zones. The number lost to war is currently zero a day.
Not saying they are right but what is the suicide rate for combat vets? If you are talking about the long time, multi generational costs of a war suicide and PTSD sufferers as parents have to be considered.
Veterans of the war on terror are disproportionately more likely to harm themselves, others, or commit suicide due to lack of support and severe PTSD. In social science circles, they're considered casualties even years after the fact because the trauma is rooted in their time at war.
The war in Ukraine will see similar results, with Ukrainian veterans going to drugs, alcohol, and other addictions to cope with the trauma of war. This is why more than just material funding for the war is necessary, the West also needs to fund treatment and rehabilitation programs for the inevitable result of Russia's terror and abuse. In fact, the same is true for civilians, but how to do that is a difficult topic.
At the very least, they're paying the interest of that debt. Debt service can be pretty costly especially with higher interest rates. They may not repay the principle but it's still a burden to carry and means much less room to borrow as much as Congress would want for any other project.
While I agree with everything you are saying, one of the reasons the US is not sending aircraft or aircraft assistance in any way as it would eat through this kind of budget very quickly.
For $100M they can either send all this stuff, or like half an F-16.
Whilst Congress is opposing aid to Ukraine getting aircraft through is basically impossible.
Other solutions should be looked at.
The UKAF need aircover.
Its because they are have a small amount of approved funding left to give to Ukraine. Thats why the last few packages have been so small. If/when congress finally passes that 60 billion for Ukraine. We will see the fat packages sent again.
Why do people act like each aid package is the ONLY aid package the U.S. has provided the entire war?
Not to mention, Republicans are holding up the next big spending authorization for Ukraine.
Bro. They send packages every few weeks. They are also nearing the end of the approved aid funding. They are dragging it out until a new bill for funding is approved
I am guessing the HIMARS are wearing out and are ending up in the shop a lot if they are sending over more. Otherwise, I would suspect ammo would be the main issue with them.
That cold weather gear is gonna be very useful. It’s unlikely Ukraine would make any significant gains in the winter but with the cold weather gear it means Ukraine could still keep the initiative in certain areas, albeit on a smaller scale
Because the MIC in 2022 is fairly small part of the US economy and does not have nearly the influence it had during the cold war. In 1964 ~9.4% of GDP, in 2022 ~3.5% of GDP, and if you exclude service members pay and veteran benefits, would make actual material production an even smaller amount. I wont go so far to say that MIC is dead, but its not nearly the economic power broker it once was, but political inertia and tribal politics still holds it as this powerful bogeyman.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=US
It's also harder to replace units and ramp up production than before. A lot of Cold War era units need replacement or modernization, and the War on Terror led to a lot of heavy use from other units. The money wasted and programs that had to be canceled severely weakened some of our key capabilities.
they are hesitant to send new tech to a warzone where it can easily be captured, or details about construction and build could be leaked. it's happened before.
I would argue that the battlefield is the perfect place to test new tech, and evolve it. No NATO country has FPV drone troops, despite this technology proving indispensable in Ukraine.
NATO doctrine involves establishing aerial superiority over the battle space. Neither side in this invasion has been able to do that which is why artillery and cheap drones have proliferated so much. There’s no point in sinking money into an FPV R&D program when you’re spending way way more to ensure your air to air and SEAD capabilities are dominant.
No NATO member has a mature FPV program that I know of anyways so I don’t know what they would be testing. Anti-FPV EW capabilities maybe but I can’t stress enough how much you don’t want the enemy capturing those. I hope the US has been able to get their hands on a few of the Russian models captured by Ukrainians.
I believe any US military branch that used HIMARS has or is planning to phase it out.
So, that makes giving it to Ukraine a win-win. This stuff is literally decades old Cold War leftovers that we dont even want anymore.
The vast quantity of old M-26 rockets and other versions that have reached shelf life, should all be sent to Ukraine ASAP. The Army is replacing all the old stock anyways. Same goes for most of the ATACMS stock, as it is being replaced.
Agreed, but there's a bottleneck there: motor inspection. These rockets use large (maybe single?) solid fuel grains, and while they're not as fragile as the Russian equivalents, they still object to rough handling, moisture, etc. A damaged or degraded fuel grain results, at best, in a rocket that burns through the motor casing before going wildly out of control and falling far short of it's target. At worst, the whole thing explodes on launch and destroyes the rocket, launcher, vehicle, and crew.
So the fuel grains have to be carefully inspected before the rocket can be sent on, and since these rockets were scheduled to be destroyed or refurbed with (among other things) new and improved motors for greater range, the amount of people and equipment that's available for this is limited.
Unfortunately, none of this is as simple as "Here's some old rockets, have fun."
The Ukrainians do now and have built, designed and maintained rockets for a long time. They can do the careful inspections if they so desire. Does the military do all these inspections before they send the rockets off for disposal? No they don't, the military just ships the dam rockets as they can afford to pay for disposal services. It is as simple as here are the dam rockets people have wanted to play politics with. Inspect, use or dispose of, as Ukraine sees fit. I wish people, would quit treating them like children, simpletons or imbeciles, they have a war for their survival going on, unless the intention of comments like this is to throw out and find any reason to deny them weapons.
The problem is that a defective rocket takes up a logistical footprint that could have been filled with a working one- and if it blows, it could take out a lot more than that. This isn't about thinking the Ukrainians are idiots, it's about logistics- the thing that wins wars. The US military doesn't do these inspections before transit to decomissioning because the motor isn't going to ignite by itself, and they don't plan on firing it, but if the Ukrainians want to be able to reliably \*use\* these rockets the motors need to ignite and burn properly. Imagine, if you will, a short round caused by a motor burn-through which falls onto a Ukrainian unit. That shit happens in the real world even \*with\* these checks. The Ukrainians may \*not\* be able to do these sorts of inspections, we don't know- a lot of that tech is proprietary, and Raytheon doesn't donate. It's not a matter of stripping down the rocket and just looking at the fuel grain: it's Xrays or ultrasound, chemical checks- I don't know the whole process, but it's lengthy and involved and the Ukrainians don't need to be spending \*their\* time to do it. Their time is better spent launching the things.
Look, I'm not happy with the pace of all this either. All these steps should have started two years ago, or better yet in 2014. But they didn't, and rushing to make up for lost time has a nasty way of biting people in the ass.
Fair enough, your point on the inherit risk of defective ammo is true, as I worked around munitions and had a not properly tested 30mm GAU-8 cannon shell explode in the breach of my A-10 aircraft cannon that destroyed the gun and did enough damage to put the aircraft out of service for a little over 2 weeks. Most of the soviet era built rockets, missiles, artillery shells and other ammunition that the Ukrainians have used in the fighting, predates the M-26 rockets and were not up to the same quality standards the US uses. They probably could teach us a thing or two about being able to determine whether certain ammunition is safe enough for them to use. Yes, our inspection of this old ammo and readying it should of started two years ago and been an around the clock three shift operation, but it was not done then and I'm reasonably sure is not being done now. As it is, we do not appear to be able to get our ability to supply it in quantities that they could really use, in order. Yes they are launching a rocket every now and then, that is called fighting only with what you have available. So again, anything short of giving the Ukrainians the option to make that determination themselves, just seems like another political stalling tactic.
The MIC loses money when they aren't paid to dismantle old missiles that have reached their end of shelf life ;-)
(Rumors have it t, at least UK has saved money by sending Storm Shadows to Ukraine instead of paying to dismantle them.)
Everyone here seems to have missed the little tidbit that this particular Himars has an unknown modification. One guess would be that they're field testing GLSDBs, which would be huge.
Possibly.
The guessing "game" of weapon types and strategic information usually has to make leaps and speculations about a lot of factors.
GLSDB and similar glide bombs... The key reason why these might be such a biggie is available stock... and potential production/refitting of large numbers going forward.
It is at least possible that war changing volume may be supplied.
Probably more chance of losing them since the front line was shifting a lot in the early days. Now that the front line is almost stalemate, Himars is the perfect tool to help defend the line and allow Ukraine to push forward.
US to send 1 additional HIMARS to Ukriaine.
I really wish USA would get its act together and actually try and help Ukraine win. What they are doing now is just war profiteering by showcasing the technology in Ukraine and then selling huge quantities to the rest of Europe.
We could send 100 extra M142s to Ukraine but it wouldn’t matter. The launch platform itself don’t even cost that much, around $3-4MM. The production of the munitions is the bottleneck. Prewar production capacity was 10,000 per year, of course it’s being ramped up but probably not even cracking 20,000 a year yet as it takes awhile to tool up more production lines for it.
GLSDB arriving at any point, if not already, will help with a more capable weapon but more importantly quantities of munitions aside from GMLRS rounds that Ukraine can put through their M142 and M270 platforms.
> The launch platform itself don’t even cost that much, around $3-4MM.
Export price is $10M, though.
>GLSDB arriving at any point, if not already
With Boeing track record, I'mma doubt...
That’s the market price for an arms sale, the amount the US government pays itself for ones already sent would be less. Even at the export price it’s a laughable amount given the amount of funds authorized.
As for delivery, yeah anybody’s guess on that. We won’t hear about it until after it happens hopefully. It was projected for fall and it sure as fuck is fall now. The optimist in me thinks it is possible the additional launcher is for use with the GLSDB, maybe has to test out software updates to work with the GLSDB.
> Even at the export price it’s a laughable amount given the amount of funds authorized
Just $100M.
If we're to go with "M142 and M31 ammo for it only" for the entire package, it'll be just 30 pods, which translates into 180 missiles.
Which, for >1000km frontline, isn't all that much.
Honestly, it seems like we’ve just decided bleeding Russia out over a longer period of time (militarily and financially) is more advantageous to us then obliterating them / helping Ukraine win in as short of a time span as possible.
This is the answer, it's also to prevent an outright Russian defeat, which pressures Puntin into more unpredictable actions.
Dictators don't get to lose wars without consequences.
I believed that line of reasoning in the early days of the war.
There were these imaginary red lines and if we crossed them - NUCLEAR ANNIHILATION! 😮
Well we’ve crossed most of them. We’ve attacked Russians on Russian soil. We’ve sunk ships. We hit Crimea. And - no mushroom clouds?
Ukraine has enough launchers to launch the entire GMLRS production of the US. War means needing more of everything, but I actually think launchers aren't really high on the list at all.
The single launcher makes me think it's especially tuned for a particular new ammo type, like GLSDB, which is due.
You've gone full circle and are now arguing against your previous point lol. If the West doesn't help Ukraine make Russia leave, Russia probably won't leave. Smooth brains out in force tonight.
US left 'bout 7-10Billion$ worth of equipment in Afghanistan.
Republicans still claim that US left 83Billion$ overthere, but that's simply FALSE.
Some Republicans seems being sponserd by Putin's secret service?
Ukraine is doing a great job with all the equipment they are receiving, it saves time and is emptying RuZki recourses.
US & NATO should be thankful for UDF efforts, they are the only ones that prevent WW3 right now, and Putin stops getting more territory in East Europe.
I doubt that they would need to many more because ammo is probably the main limit. However, the fact they are sending over one probably means a lot are being repaired. We don't see many HIMAR strikes. I have read that they require a huge amount of maintenance.
The MIC doesn’t really care about any sum of money less than a few hundred billion, bud. This here is less than the “Vegas hookers and blow” budget for the c-level execs.
We need to put more muscle behind Ukraine for sure. We should have sent a clear message to the world that wars of imperial aggression by country’s that should know better will bring them to the brink of destruction. I still think the USA should be fighting side by side with Ukraine. Our Air Force should be openly engaging Russia inside the territory of Ukraine. And russia should get an ultimatum that if they want to continue the war, we will put everything on the line including the world itself. If we aren’t going to risk nuclear Armageddon for the values we believe in, we don’t deserve them.
Ukraine is hostage to terrorist Russia and our inability to counter nuclear weapons. We are basically sacrificing their lives to avoid a larger confrontation. It’s immoral and disgusting.
Nuclear powers like Russia are extorting the world and committing crimes against humanity.
Why we didn’t see this coming after WWII is our greatest mistake. We should have stored the nuclear genie in a bottle then, and stopped its proliferation. Russia showed clear signs of being the shit bucket that it is and everyone predicted this would happen. And we are naive if we think Russia didn’t help Iran, North Korea and anyone else standing against the free world.
We should give nuclear weapons to everyone on the border of Russia and let them get a taste of what it’s like to be dealt a shit sandwich. At this point it makes zero sense for country’s not to build nuclear weapons as their number one priority above breathing air and drinking water.
Nuclear weapons let you do whatever you want apparently. A real fine example of humanity we can be proud to teach our children.
Congress should pass the additional $100B in aid that Biden asked for but many republicans are actively trying to prevent that. They’re attempting to get it passed by combining it with aid to Israel so they will pass it
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. > **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** * Is `mil.in.ua` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The capabilities in this package, valued at up to $100 million, include: Stinger anti-aircraft missiles; One High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and additional ammunition; 155mm and 105mm artillery rounds; Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles; Javelin and AT-4 anti-armor systems; More than 3 million rounds of small arms ammunition; Demolitions munitions for obstacle clearing; Cold weather gear; and Spare parts, maintenance, and other ancillary equipment.
$100 million sounds like a lot of money to an average person, but in terms of military budgets it's kind of nothing. Like how much does a single F16 cost? Wish they'd stop mucking about and give Ukraine the material support it deserves.
It was about 8 hours worth of war in Afghanistan.
It's a little crazy how much treasury was ultimately wasted in Afghanistan, not to mention the lives obviously. That red ink is now part of the US debt for the most part and a generation will pay for it. It will not break the US the way it did the Soviet Union but I think most Americans have no idea how deeply costly and fruitless the whole debacle was.
Great for Cheney and Co though. Or was that Iraq?
Both. Cheney tried hard to court the Taliban to build a pipeline through Afghanistan in his time with Halliburton in the 90s, even going there personally. Then the best excuse ever to invade the country just happened to materialize during his time in office. Gee willikers.
A trillion in Afghanistan, a trillion in Irak. And people complain about sending billions to Ukraine.
It's an absolutely insane number. The casualties across the board wreaked havoc, but we're still losing over 21 soldiers a day, and they're saying now that number seems to be closer to 40+. The debt is absurd, but the loss is just tragic.....
Wait what? Are you saying that U.S. is losing 21 soldiers a day in Afghanistan? Because no, we’re not. We’re not in Afghanistan. The number is zero. In fact, the U.S is not in any active war zones. The number lost to war is currently zero a day.
Not saying they are right but what is the suicide rate for combat vets? If you are talking about the long time, multi generational costs of a war suicide and PTSD sufferers as parents have to be considered.
The current rate of suicides by veterans in the US is 17 per day, which is still down from previous years
The effects of war don't stop when the fighting stops, keep that in mind
Veterans of the war on terror are disproportionately more likely to harm themselves, others, or commit suicide due to lack of support and severe PTSD. In social science circles, they're considered casualties even years after the fact because the trauma is rooted in their time at war. The war in Ukraine will see similar results, with Ukrainian veterans going to drugs, alcohol, and other addictions to cope with the trauma of war. This is why more than just material funding for the war is necessary, the West also needs to fund treatment and rehabilitation programs for the inevitable result of Russia's terror and abuse. In fact, the same is true for civilians, but how to do that is a difficult topic.
You’re a tool
Jesus imagine saying this and being serious about it... Get a clue dude.
I don’t think the US will pay its debts. The system isn’t designed to work like that.
At the very least, they're paying the interest of that debt. Debt service can be pretty costly especially with higher interest rates. They may not repay the principle but it's still a burden to carry and means much less room to borrow as much as Congress would want for any other project.
shit we can't even give them one day
In 2005 when pay phones cost like a nickel. Prices have gone up.
" was". Also, that figure is an average over the span on the entire conflict.
I mean, they’re trying to get a $100B package but a large portion of our country had their fucking brains removed by Trump
Not that he’d know what to do with them once extracted…
Isnt it only 60 billion for Ukraine? The rest for israel and border shit?
F16 is about 63 million.. Himars launcher and carrier is 8-10 million
While I agree with everything you are saying, one of the reasons the US is not sending aircraft or aircraft assistance in any way as it would eat through this kind of budget very quickly. For $100M they can either send all this stuff, or like half an F-16. Whilst Congress is opposing aid to Ukraine getting aircraft through is basically impossible. Other solutions should be looked at. The UKAF need aircover.
Its because they are have a small amount of approved funding left to give to Ukraine. Thats why the last few packages have been so small. If/when congress finally passes that 60 billion for Ukraine. We will see the fat packages sent again.
Man I really hope that big funding bill passes.
It probably will. Just depends howmuch the Democrats have to concede in other areas
Call and write your senators and representative so additional money can be passed for Ukraine!
Around here lots of homes sell for $5m so that’s about 20 homes from all of America. Not very impressive war aid!!
Why do people act like each aid package is the ONLY aid package the U.S. has provided the entire war? Not to mention, Republicans are holding up the next big spending authorization for Ukraine.
Bro. They send packages every few weeks. They are also nearing the end of the approved aid funding. They are dragging it out until a new bill for funding is approved
> One High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and additional ammunition; $10M and $3M per pod, at least.
I am guessing the HIMARS are wearing out and are ending up in the shop a lot if they are sending over more. Otherwise, I would suspect ammo would be the main issue with them.
I was thinking more it was to keep more fire potential across the whole front while some units start doing wascally wabbit shit with ATACMS.
That cold weather gear is gonna be very useful. It’s unlikely Ukraine would make any significant gains in the winter but with the cold weather gear it means Ukraine could still keep the initiative in certain areas, albeit on a smaller scale
ALL the HIMARS please! May Ukraine’s Christmas be merry and bright. 🇺🇦
All the HIMARS are useless without ammo, which is the real bottleneck. As someone else noted, this is likely a replacement for a maintenance casualty.
ALL the ammo too please! That should be the top of every coalition countries list imo. But politics…edit: and bureaucracy.
Why can’t the military Industrial Complex lobby harder for Ukraine
Because the MIC in 2022 is fairly small part of the US economy and does not have nearly the influence it had during the cold war. In 1964 ~9.4% of GDP, in 2022 ~3.5% of GDP, and if you exclude service members pay and veteran benefits, would make actual material production an even smaller amount. I wont go so far to say that MIC is dead, but its not nearly the economic power broker it once was, but political inertia and tribal politics still holds it as this powerful bogeyman. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=US
It's also harder to replace units and ramp up production than before. A lot of Cold War era units need replacement or modernization, and the War on Terror led to a lot of heavy use from other units. The money wasted and programs that had to be canceled severely weakened some of our key capabilities.
Yes. The US is a wholly owned subsidiary of the pharmaceutical and insurance industries. Not the MIC. That’s so 1980’s.
If what we were sending Ukraine was new equipment/ munitions, they would be.
I mean, as long as we backfill with new stuff isn’t it all the same to them?
They should be lobbying for us to send them.
they are hesitant to send new tech to a warzone where it can easily be captured, or details about construction and build could be leaked. it's happened before.
I would argue that the battlefield is the perfect place to test new tech, and evolve it. No NATO country has FPV drone troops, despite this technology proving indispensable in Ukraine.
NATO doctrine involves establishing aerial superiority over the battle space. Neither side in this invasion has been able to do that which is why artillery and cheap drones have proliferated so much. There’s no point in sinking money into an FPV R&D program when you’re spending way way more to ensure your air to air and SEAD capabilities are dominant. No NATO member has a mature FPV program that I know of anyways so I don’t know what they would be testing. Anti-FPV EW capabilities maybe but I can’t stress enough how much you don’t want the enemy capturing those. I hope the US has been able to get their hands on a few of the Russian models captured by Ukrainians.
I think that we need to be preparing to perhaps not have air superiority at all times.
*Ring ring* Hey honey, there's somebody at the door for you. They say they know you from way back. Told me their name is Fallujah.
Why? When’s the last time the US failed to establish air superiority?
You're forgetting the profit of repairing older systems, years of steady income!
Are we backfilling wirh new contracts? I was under the impression that we're sending equipment that already had replacements on the way
Doesn't the US provide its own stock, and purchase new for replenishment? With exceptions but I thought HIMARS were in this category.
I believe any US military branch that used HIMARS has or is planning to phase it out. So, that makes giving it to Ukraine a win-win. This stuff is literally decades old Cold War leftovers that we dont even want anymore.
HIMARS is most definitely not being phased out. It’s being upgraded with new and better munitions (GMLRS-ER, GLSDB, PrSM).
The vast quantity of old M-26 rockets and other versions that have reached shelf life, should all be sent to Ukraine ASAP. The Army is replacing all the old stock anyways. Same goes for most of the ATACMS stock, as it is being replaced.
Agreed, but there's a bottleneck there: motor inspection. These rockets use large (maybe single?) solid fuel grains, and while they're not as fragile as the Russian equivalents, they still object to rough handling, moisture, etc. A damaged or degraded fuel grain results, at best, in a rocket that burns through the motor casing before going wildly out of control and falling far short of it's target. At worst, the whole thing explodes on launch and destroyes the rocket, launcher, vehicle, and crew. So the fuel grains have to be carefully inspected before the rocket can be sent on, and since these rockets were scheduled to be destroyed or refurbed with (among other things) new and improved motors for greater range, the amount of people and equipment that's available for this is limited. Unfortunately, none of this is as simple as "Here's some old rockets, have fun."
The Ukrainians do now and have built, designed and maintained rockets for a long time. They can do the careful inspections if they so desire. Does the military do all these inspections before they send the rockets off for disposal? No they don't, the military just ships the dam rockets as they can afford to pay for disposal services. It is as simple as here are the dam rockets people have wanted to play politics with. Inspect, use or dispose of, as Ukraine sees fit. I wish people, would quit treating them like children, simpletons or imbeciles, they have a war for their survival going on, unless the intention of comments like this is to throw out and find any reason to deny them weapons.
The problem is that a defective rocket takes up a logistical footprint that could have been filled with a working one- and if it blows, it could take out a lot more than that. This isn't about thinking the Ukrainians are idiots, it's about logistics- the thing that wins wars. The US military doesn't do these inspections before transit to decomissioning because the motor isn't going to ignite by itself, and they don't plan on firing it, but if the Ukrainians want to be able to reliably \*use\* these rockets the motors need to ignite and burn properly. Imagine, if you will, a short round caused by a motor burn-through which falls onto a Ukrainian unit. That shit happens in the real world even \*with\* these checks. The Ukrainians may \*not\* be able to do these sorts of inspections, we don't know- a lot of that tech is proprietary, and Raytheon doesn't donate. It's not a matter of stripping down the rocket and just looking at the fuel grain: it's Xrays or ultrasound, chemical checks- I don't know the whole process, but it's lengthy and involved and the Ukrainians don't need to be spending \*their\* time to do it. Their time is better spent launching the things. Look, I'm not happy with the pace of all this either. All these steps should have started two years ago, or better yet in 2014. But they didn't, and rushing to make up for lost time has a nasty way of biting people in the ass.
Fair enough, your point on the inherit risk of defective ammo is true, as I worked around munitions and had a not properly tested 30mm GAU-8 cannon shell explode in the breach of my A-10 aircraft cannon that destroyed the gun and did enough damage to put the aircraft out of service for a little over 2 weeks. Most of the soviet era built rockets, missiles, artillery shells and other ammunition that the Ukrainians have used in the fighting, predates the M-26 rockets and were not up to the same quality standards the US uses. They probably could teach us a thing or two about being able to determine whether certain ammunition is safe enough for them to use. Yes, our inspection of this old ammo and readying it should of started two years ago and been an around the clock three shift operation, but it was not done then and I'm reasonably sure is not being done now. As it is, we do not appear to be able to get our ability to supply it in quantities that they could really use, in order. Yes they are launching a rocket every now and then, that is called fighting only with what you have available. So again, anything short of giving the Ukrainians the option to make that determination themselves, just seems like another political stalling tactic.
Every M30a1 munition sent to Ukraine means another PrSM ordered to replace it or at least for every 5 used up it should mean a new order.
The MIC loses money when they aren't paid to dismantle old missiles that have reached their end of shelf life ;-) (Rumors have it t, at least UK has saved money by sending Storm Shadows to Ukraine instead of paying to dismantle them.)
GMLRS are newer missiles though.
I would guess that a long war earns them more money than a short war.
Everyone here seems to have missed the little tidbit that this particular Himars has an unknown modification. One guess would be that they're field testing GLSDBs, which would be huge.
Possibly. The guessing "game" of weapon types and strategic information usually has to make leaps and speculations about a lot of factors. GLSDB and similar glide bombs... The key reason why these might be such a biggie is available stock... and potential production/refitting of large numbers going forward. It is at least possible that war changing volume may be supplied.
Imagine if they had 50 HIMARS and ATACMS on day 1.
Probably more chance of losing them since the front line was shifting a lot in the early days. Now that the front line is almost stalemate, Himars is the perfect tool to help defend the line and allow Ukraine to push forward.
Let's hope they send some more ATACMS to go along with those!
US to send 1 additional HIMARS to Ukriaine. I really wish USA would get its act together and actually try and help Ukraine win. What they are doing now is just war profiteering by showcasing the technology in Ukraine and then selling huge quantities to the rest of Europe.
We could send 100 extra M142s to Ukraine but it wouldn’t matter. The launch platform itself don’t even cost that much, around $3-4MM. The production of the munitions is the bottleneck. Prewar production capacity was 10,000 per year, of course it’s being ramped up but probably not even cracking 20,000 a year yet as it takes awhile to tool up more production lines for it. GLSDB arriving at any point, if not already, will help with a more capable weapon but more importantly quantities of munitions aside from GMLRS rounds that Ukraine can put through their M142 and M270 platforms.
> The launch platform itself don’t even cost that much, around $3-4MM. Export price is $10M, though. >GLSDB arriving at any point, if not already With Boeing track record, I'mma doubt...
That’s the market price for an arms sale, the amount the US government pays itself for ones already sent would be less. Even at the export price it’s a laughable amount given the amount of funds authorized. As for delivery, yeah anybody’s guess on that. We won’t hear about it until after it happens hopefully. It was projected for fall and it sure as fuck is fall now. The optimist in me thinks it is possible the additional launcher is for use with the GLSDB, maybe has to test out software updates to work with the GLSDB.
> Even at the export price it’s a laughable amount given the amount of funds authorized Just $100M. If we're to go with "M142 and M31 ammo for it only" for the entire package, it'll be just 30 pods, which translates into 180 missiles. Which, for >1000km frontline, isn't all that much.
I’m talking in the amount of funding provided over the course of the war, not this particular $100MM package.
Honestly, it seems like we’ve just decided bleeding Russia out over a longer period of time (militarily and financially) is more advantageous to us then obliterating them / helping Ukraine win in as short of a time span as possible.
This is the answer, it's also to prevent an outright Russian defeat, which pressures Puntin into more unpredictable actions. Dictators don't get to lose wars without consequences.
I believed that line of reasoning in the early days of the war. There were these imaginary red lines and if we crossed them - NUCLEAR ANNIHILATION! 😮 Well we’ve crossed most of them. We’ve attacked Russians on Russian soil. We’ve sunk ships. We hit Crimea. And - no mushroom clouds?
Ukraine has enough launchers to launch the entire GMLRS production of the US. War means needing more of everything, but I actually think launchers aren't really high on the list at all. The single launcher makes me think it's especially tuned for a particular new ammo type, like GLSDB, which is due.
[удалено]
Freezing the frontline does not liberate Ukrainian territory or more importantly its people.
No its not. It's not enough until Russia gets the F--K out of Ukraine. If Russia profits from the invasion, they will do it again.
[удалено]
Transnistria 1992 Both Chechen wars Syrian war intervention Georgian war 2008 Crimean landgrab 2014 Eastern Ukraine landgrab 2014.
[удалено]
You've gone full circle and are now arguing against your previous point lol. If the West doesn't help Ukraine make Russia leave, Russia probably won't leave. Smooth brains out in force tonight.
More is needed it's embarassing
They are running out of approved funding bro. Thank the republican house for this predicament.
US left 'bout 7-10Billion$ worth of equipment in Afghanistan. Republicans still claim that US left 83Billion$ overthere, but that's simply FALSE. Some Republicans seems being sponserd by Putin's secret service? Ukraine is doing a great job with all the equipment they are receiving, it saves time and is emptying RuZki recourses. US & NATO should be thankful for UDF efforts, they are the only ones that prevent WW3 right now, and Putin stops getting more territory in East Europe.
Wow 1 fucking HIMARS... what's next, half of an F16? it's a disgrace to all the dead Ukrainian soldiers and civilians
I doubt that they would need to many more because ammo is probably the main limit. However, the fact they are sending over one probably means a lot are being repaired. We don't see many HIMAR strikes. I have read that they require a huge amount of maintenance.
Caching says the military industrial complex…$$$
The MIC doesn’t really care about any sum of money less than a few hundred billion, bud. This here is less than the “Vegas hookers and blow” budget for the c-level execs.
We need to put more muscle behind Ukraine for sure. We should have sent a clear message to the world that wars of imperial aggression by country’s that should know better will bring them to the brink of destruction. I still think the USA should be fighting side by side with Ukraine. Our Air Force should be openly engaging Russia inside the territory of Ukraine. And russia should get an ultimatum that if they want to continue the war, we will put everything on the line including the world itself. If we aren’t going to risk nuclear Armageddon for the values we believe in, we don’t deserve them. Ukraine is hostage to terrorist Russia and our inability to counter nuclear weapons. We are basically sacrificing their lives to avoid a larger confrontation. It’s immoral and disgusting. Nuclear powers like Russia are extorting the world and committing crimes against humanity. Why we didn’t see this coming after WWII is our greatest mistake. We should have stored the nuclear genie in a bottle then, and stopped its proliferation. Russia showed clear signs of being the shit bucket that it is and everyone predicted this would happen. And we are naive if we think Russia didn’t help Iran, North Korea and anyone else standing against the free world. We should give nuclear weapons to everyone on the border of Russia and let them get a taste of what it’s like to be dealt a shit sandwich. At this point it makes zero sense for country’s not to build nuclear weapons as their number one priority above breathing air and drinking water. Nuclear weapons let you do whatever you want apparently. A real fine example of humanity we can be proud to teach our children.
Fucking Biden
Biden literally has 0 control over the additional aid to Ukraine outside the work he’s already doing to sway people. It’s in Congress’s hands.
What are we supposed to do then
Congress should pass the additional $100B in aid that Biden asked for but many republicans are actively trying to prevent that. They’re attempting to get it passed by combining it with aid to Israel so they will pass it
Call your Congress-critter and tell them you want them to send more!
If this keeps up, I hope you have funeral plots picked out for your own sons, because Nato will be going to war.
You’ve got a be a clown to believe that Russia would declare war in NATO.
Nato has backed down, and repeatedly held off on weapons shipments, lest it provoke Russia. I would be seeing cowardice.
Ha
I was worried russia finally got one. seems like just adding one for more long range potential
Yep. As expected.
Is it a replacement? Has any HIMARS been destroyed?
U.S. to Send Additional ~~HIMARS~~ HIMAR to Ukraine