>>64967138Probably never because whatever others make and we do it for 10 to 20 times the cost because of changes being made that deviate from very concept of actual cheap along fat profit margins.
>>64967138When we start buying from non-legacy defense contractors
>>64967138If a cheaper cruise missile can prove to be just as accurate and use the same launch systems then we'd switch to them slow.
munitions are going to end up with the same high-low paradigm as fighterscheap mass is great until you have a job that cheap won't cut it at, and then cheap is worthless
>>64967138If anything, the current price of US cruise missiles are dirt cheap compared to what you get. You should realistically be paying close to double. People don't understand the underlying expenses involved in the production of a modern Tomahawk. Do you think politicians are free? Do you know how many of them Raytheon had to buy? They are competing with dozens of defense firms in purchasing politicians. Be glad they don't just add another zero to the price, they could since it is on your tab but they don't because they are patriots. Now you want a missile that is 1/20th the price, talk about ungrateful.
>>64967138Right now, it's called LUCAS.
the cost of weapons literally doesn't matter when you win every war and run the global economy thereby
>>64967406This. I anticipate the US will soon be rolling out a line of cheaper, more spammable munitions soon, but using this poses logistic challenges. You only have so many VLS on a ship, you're going to want every missile to count--that is, be accurate, fast, and hard to track. You don't want to waste precious missile space for lawn mower with wings that a guy in a biplane can shoot down with a rifle. So the US will need to add new launch methods. Im assuming we keep our ships stocked with modern, expensive missiles and relegate the drone spam to land-based systems.The issue with retard spamming slow, vulnerable drones is that they're not conducive to the NATO way of war, which is SUPPOSED to be high energy, integrated, decisive battle using combined arms to achieve rapid victory. The only reason drones and cheap shit short range missiles are even relevant is that the US and its allies are too chicken shit to conduct a proper invasion anymore. Or, in Ukraines case, to give them the equipment they need to conduct truly effective offensive operations. So they're stuck defending and the drones keep coming. None of that is an issue if you have a large military conducting large scale mechanized attacks supported by precision fires and tactical and strategic air strikes, EW, cyber attacks, and spook shit all at the same time the way decisive battle is SUPPOSED to be done. But the US is not launching large scale invasions any time soon. This MEU shit is still like 2.5k men and with a limited mission scope lmao.You say "we" so im assuming you mean the US. I thing the Germs and French are already starting up production of cheap drones/missiles. Their need is primarily defensive, vs the US's which is expeditionary, so this makes sense. I think the US is absolutely lacking in this capacity and hope they fix it. They'll probably spend billions on 'slightly less expensive' tomahawk-lites and call it a win.
Start beating your workers when they demand a raise in pay.Also remove the jewish debt based system.
>>64967138There are several we are making mostly to sell to Ukraine, I assume if they do alright there you’ll see a lot of them end up in inventory. There’s a lot of irons in the affordable mass fire right now, give it a couple years to see what works and what does will proliferate
>>64967481>So the US will need to add new launch methodsSounds like it's time to redesign the Trump Class Battleship and the FF(X).
>>64967138Anduril's cruise missiles are supposed to cost about $250k each, the Barracuda-500 variant which the Taiwanese are going to be building a lot of.
>>64967481Maybe the should have another crack at that arsenal ship version of the San Antonio.
>>64967481>>64968016The plan is autonomous ships with cargo container launchers. The Senate Armed Services committee has had several meetings with multiple domestic drone ship manufacturers, and the navy and DARPA have been working on and with prototypes. They want to do the same thing the CCA program is doing for manned fighters, every Burke has accompanying drone ships to use for carrying cheaper munitions/absorbing hits, and hundreds of autonomous logistical ships.
