Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 05/03/2005 View Mon 05/02/2005 View Sun 05/01/2005 View Sat 04/30/2005 View Fri 04/29/2005 View Thu 04/28/2005 View Wed 04/27/2005
1
2005-05-03 Home Front: Tech
U.S. Army Builds More Smart Weapons
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Steve 2005-05-03 1:00:05 PM|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Some army officers are wondering why they can’t have their larger transport helicopters fly high and drop 500 or 250 pound JDAMs out the back.
Arclight a la Chinook, Bay-bee!
Posted by Dar">Dar  2005-05-03 13:49||   2005-05-03 13:49|| Front Page Top

#2 Now if only they could figure out how to get Smart Opponents.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-05-03 15:54||   2005-05-03 15:54|| Front Page Top

#3 Some army officers are wondering why they can’t have their larger transport helicopters fly high and drop 500 or 250 pound JDAMs out the back

One word why, SAMs. Choppers survive by moving quickly by NAP of the earth (Near As Possible) or by using terrain to mask their movement. That was one thing pounded into the chopper pilots in the 101st, when I was there, over and over again. Stay low, stay alive. Go high, and you will die. Somolia proved that concept when Blackhawks were forced to fly slow and not very low to have the terrain protect them. The apachies that were dropped in Iraqi Freedom had the same issue. They flew high and right into a kill box and some got shot down. A chinook(sp?) is a lumbering target anyway and above enemy positions is just begging to be blown away.
From my infantry experiance, I still support the GPS guided weapons for the army's artillery for short range targets. It allows for rapid destruction of the target and the air force doesn't have to have a lot of aircraft lotering over the front line. The air force can then use the freed up aircraft to blow the ever-loving hell out of the enemy's infastructure to deny supplies and reinforcments from reaching the front line.
Posted by mmurray821 2005-05-03 15:56||   2005-05-03 15:56|| Front Page Top

#4  The apachies that were dropped in Iraqi Freedom had the same issue. They flew high and right into a kill box and some got shot down

My understanding is that the big Apache raid was pretty much a fiasco.
Posted by Shipman 2005-05-03 16:38||   2005-05-03 16:38|| Front Page Top

#5 Oh you say fiasco and I say goatscrew...
Posted by mmurray821 2005-05-03 17:52||   2005-05-03 17:52|| Front Page Top

#6 Well goatscrew is purdy technical and I like to keep all things simple.
Posted by Shipman 2005-05-03 18:53||   2005-05-03 18:53|| Front Page Top

#7 During Vietnam, the Army tried an experimental program, called ''Deathwatch'' (I believe). Its basic concept was that, instead of having only officers call in artillery, most of whom were infantry, infantry units would be accompanied by highly expert enlisted field artillerymen. These guys were so expert, they could put the right kind of round, right on target, yesterday. It made infantry missions a breeze and the infantry loved it. So, of course, it was cancelled. There was much bitter resentment against having enlisted men calling in fires, and as effective as it was, it was discontinued.
Posted by Anonymoose 2005-05-03 19:05||   2005-05-03 19:05|| Front Page Top

23:49 SwissTex
23:42 Asedwich
23:35 Asedwich
22:39 Frank G
22:37 eLarson
22:28 buwaya
22:25 buwaya
22:04 phil_b
22:03 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom
21:58 Alaska Paul
21:57 john
21:53 Asedwich
21:48 Fred as himself
21:46 Asedwich
21:41 phil_b
21:34 Fred
21:25 Asedwich
21:11 Super Hose
21:10 Asedwich
21:08 Frank G
21:07 Super Hose
21:05 Frank G
21:04 Super Hose
21:02 Frank G









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com