View Full Version : Economically efficient weapons
Roguish Lawyer
06-24-2005, 15:54
Thought I'd try to get a discussion going about something this afternoon.
What weapon do you believe is the most economically efficient weapon in our arsenal? What is the least efficient?
By "efficient," I mean military value compared to monetary cost of procurement, maintenance, storage, etc.
I want to limit the discussion to non-human weapons such as rifles and aircraft.
:munchin
The Reaper
06-24-2005, 16:27
Thought I'd try to get a discussion going about something this afternoon.
What weapon do you believe is the most economically efficient weapon in our arsenal? What is the least efficient?
By "efficient," I mean military value compared to monetary cost of procurement, maintenance, storage, etc.
I want to limit the discussion to non-human weapons such as rifles and aircraft.
:munchin
A knife.
TR
Ambush Master
06-24-2005, 16:43
A garrote or, to bring it into more modern times, a large Zip Tie !!! :D
Team Sergeant
06-24-2005, 16:48
Psychological Operations
Psychological Operationswhile i served as a POG pogue and believe, properly employed, PSYOP is a force-multiplier and an effective means to an end, i believe PSYOP (especially the officers) do not fit into the category RL envisioned when he posed the question...methinks he was thinking hardware...and in that regard, i agree with TR regarding knives...although i do believe Colonel Ola Mize made some excellent work with an e-tool in Korea...
Jack Moroney (RIP)
06-24-2005, 19:19
What weapon do you believe is the most economically efficient weapon in our arsenal? What is the least efficient?
:munchin
For what mission/target type and desired degree of outcome?
Smokin Joe
06-24-2005, 22:17
Thought I'd try to get a discussion going about something this afternoon.
What weapon do you believe is the most economically efficient weapon in our arsenal? What is the least efficient?
By "efficient," I mean military value compared to monetary cost of procurement, maintenance, storage, etc.
I want to limit the discussion to non-human weapons such as rifles and aircraft.
:munchin
Nuclear ICBM....I think it has the most bang for the buck.
M-40A3 and similar sniper rifles..
The enemy has RPGs.
The Reaper
06-26-2005, 08:42
Nuclear ICBM....I think it has the most bang for the buck.
Do you know what one costs, including R&D?
The damage is not as extreme as some would have you believe, and the really big warheads are long since retired.
I do not personally consider fragmentation grenades all that efficient. You roll the dice with a frag, might get you, might get them, might be a short fuze, might get thrown back if you are not careful. Loud and most effective in enclosed spaces.
TR
Psychological Operations
To add to this, the mind.
Doc
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 10:33
To add to this, the mind.
Doc
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You'll all say something like this -- that's why I tried to limit this to non-human systems.
Smokin Joe
06-26-2005, 11:29
Do you know what one costs, including R&D?
TR
No Sir, I don't have the slightest idea what one costs. I was just taking a shot in the dark. Kind of along the lines of what makes the biggest bang out there. :cool:
Trip_Wire (RIP)
06-26-2005, 11:37
I'd have to vouch for the WW II type E-tool! The M-1 Grand was also a better "Club" then the currant M-16, etc. :munchin
Team Sergeant
06-26-2005, 12:01
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You'll all say something like this -- that's why I tried to limit this to non-human systems.
Well then it would seem you are more interested in a simple answer than a discussion.
To respond your question I'll try to lead you to a logical conclusion: If you were the boss, and wanted to equip your troops with the most efficient, low cost killing system available would the troops not already possess it?
In my opinion the assault rifle is the most efficient killing machine on the battlefield.
TS
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 12:08
Well then it would seem you are more interested in a simple answer than a discussion.
No, I just wanted to focus the discussion. But if you guys want to broaden the discussion, go ahead. :munchin
So far, no one has talked about any systems that cost too much.
Smokin Joe
06-26-2005, 12:13
So far, no one has talked about any systems that cost too much.
You really are an attorney aren't you? :p
Thought I'd try to get a discussion going about something this afternoon.
What weapon do you believe is the most economically efficient weapon in our arsenal? What is the least efficient?
By "efficient," I mean military value compared to monetary cost of procurement, maintenance, storage, etc.
I want to limit the discussion to non-human weapons such as rifles and aircraft.
:munchin
I personally don't see jack in your first post about too expensive. But maybe I'm missing something here....I've only been up for 30 hours. :lifter :D
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 12:20
I personally don't see jack in your first post about too expensive. But maybe I'm missing something here....I've only been up for 30 hours. :lifter :D
"What is the least efficient?"
The Reaper
06-26-2005, 12:20
In my opinion the assault rifle is the most efficient killing machine on the battlefield.
TS
Only with a competent operator. Otherwise, the rounds to kill ratio will bankrupt you.
RL, did you miss the nukes on ICBM response?
TR
The Reaper
06-26-2005, 12:22
"What is the least efficient?"
Potentially, or actually employed?
TR
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 12:22
RL, did you miss the nukes on ICBM response?
No. You asked about the costs, but did not expressly say that they are ineffieicnt.
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 12:34
I don't know what nuclear weapons cost, but it seems to me that they did a good job of deterring the Soviets. :munchin
The Reaper
06-26-2005, 12:50
I don't know what nuclear weapons cost, but it seems to me that they did a good job of deterring the Soviets. :munchin
Were they then efficient, despite the trillions spent and the zero kills since August 1945?
TR
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 13:06
Were they then efficient, despite the trillions spent and the zero kills since August 1945?
TR
Is a psyop efficient if the enemy surrenders without a shot fired?
The Reaper
06-26-2005, 13:09
Is a psyop efficient if the enemy surrenders without a shot fired?
"I want to limit the discussion to non-human weapons such as rifles and aircraft." :confused:
TR
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 13:17
"I want to limit the discussion to non-human weapons such as rifles and aircraft." :confused:
TR
"If, on the other hand, in the midst of difficulties we are always ready to seize an advantage, we may extricate ourselves from misfortune."
-- Sun Tzu
:D
The Reaper
06-26-2005, 13:24
"If, on the other hand, in the midst of difficulties we are always ready to seize an advantage, we may extricate ourselves from misfortune."
-- Sun Tzu
:D
"Arguing with a lawyer is like wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig loves it."
TR
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 13:27
"Arguing with a lawyer is like wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig loves it."
TR
OINK!
With that expressive remark we shall now dub thee....Mr. Deliverance. :D
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 14:09
With that expressive remark we shall now dub thee....Mr. Deliverance. :D
You just made the list, buddy.
You just made the list, buddy.
Why do I always have to be the psycho? ;)
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 14:45
Why do I always have to be the psycho? ;)
Squeal like a pig, boy.
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 14:46
Back on topic, please. :rolleyes:
Is a psyop efficient if the enemy surrenders without a shot fired?"To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. (Sun Tzu, 3rd Century)" that quoted, are we talking weapons, strategies, forms of warfare...?
further, a weapon that is simple and efficient in the hands of one may be cumbersome and useless in the hands of another...a weapon, a physical object, without a trained warrior is an artifact suited for display in a museum...
a warrior, with training, desire and motivation will adapt a physical object for a weapon and prevail... :munchin
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 15:16
"To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence. (Sun Tzu, 3rd Century)" that quoted, are we talking weapons, strategies, forms of warfare...?
The thread is just about weapons and their economic efficiency. I brought up psyop to illustrate a point about nuclear weapons, which TR noted have not been used since Nagasaki.
The thread is just about weapons and their economic efficiency. economic efficiency is a by-product of training... :cool:
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 15:48
economic efficiency is a by-product of training... :cool:
Fair enough, but let's assume that all users are properly trained. Training costs and training difficulties can be considered, of course.
Fair enough, but let's assume that all users are properly trained. Training costs and training difficulties can be considered, of course.
assumptions are dangerous in this line of work, counselor...a knife or bayonet, as mentioned earlier, is economic in terms of training and cheap to manufacture (unless you are dealing with Harsey, FS, et al...)
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 17:10
assumptions are dangerous in this line of work, counselor
Assumptions are dangerous in any line of work, Sir. But they are useful for academic purposes.
Assumptions are dangerous in any line of work, Sir. But they are useful for academic purposes.but Sir, name a useful academic purpose...? alas, i digress...knives, i say...
I think I vote for the E-tool.
Not present, but the UZI was developed by the Israeli because they were shelling out big bucks to their "friends" selling weapons. IIRC in 1963 while in training Group we were told that they cost around $9 - $12 dollars apiece. They were stamped and not machined. Someone once asked what was so special about the UZI, this was it.
Not present, but the UZI was developed by the Israeli because they were shelling out big bucks to their "friends" selling weapons. IIRC in 1963 while in training Group we were told that they cost around $9 - $12 dollars apiece. They were stamped and not machined. Someone once asked what was so special about the UZI, this was it.i believe this was likewise an advantage of the Sten gun during WWII...cheap and lethal...
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 18:24
Any votes for the Warthog?
Roguish Lawyer
06-26-2005, 18:27
Or this guy?
both aircraft have my deepest respect and admiration...neither are cheap...the cost of GAU-8 ammunition is fairly expensive...
Well, since we have all that "negative waves" on the Hand Grenade how about the M18A1 Claymore?
Well, since we have all that "negative waves" on the Hand Grenade how about the M18A1 Claymore?
I loved hand grenades. I used to phantasize about having a case while playing king of the mountain and just rolling them down to the bad guys. :D