Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine - We Are The Mighty
MIGHTY TACTICAL

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

Whenever you compare the merits of two firearms against one another, there will be a huge row. Just ask fans of the M1911 carbine, designed by John Moses Browning — which served in the American military as the primary sidearm for seven decades — what they think of the M9 Beretta.

But let’s take a look at two semi-automatic carbines that were in service about 70 years ago: The Russian SKS and the American M1 carbine.


Both were in service in World War II (prototypes of the SKS saw action against the Nazis) and both saw action in Korea and Vietnam. However, they’re very different.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

A Marine covers personnel during the first flag-raising on Mount Suribachi.

(USMC photo by Staff Sergeant Louis R. Lowery)

The M1 carbine, first introduced in 1942, fires a special .30-caliber round that’s about an inch-and-a-third long (as opposed to the roughly two-and-a-half-inch length of the .30-06 round). It’s semi-automatic and can use a 15 or 30-round detachable magazine. It weighs about five pounds unloaded. Today’s troops carrying a lot of stuff — that light weight can be a back-saver. The 110-grain .30 carbine round could go 1,990 feet per second.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

Malian troops stand at attention with SKS rifles.

(US Army photo by Staff Sergeant Samuel Bendet)

The SKS rifle introduced the 7.62x39mm cartridge to the world. It uses an internal 10-round magazine that is reloaded using stripper clips. In a way, this is much like how just about every modern (post-1898) military rifle prior to the M1 Garand was reloaded. The 7.62x39mm round propels a 123-grain bullet at 1,653 feet per second. The SKS weighs in at roughly eight pounds.

So, which of these rifles is better? Let’s be honest: Both have passed the longevity test. The M1 Carbine is still in service with Israel and Nicaragua, among other countries, and the SKS still sees action in places like Mali. But assuming all other things, like training and competency, are equal, a soldier with the M1 carbine would have a slight edge — at least at close range —due to the increased magazine capacity and the rifle’s lighter weight.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Check out these 4 rewarding military IT careers

The military is flush with rewarding careers that require expertise with information technology and computer systems. As the military ramps up its use of technology to augment operations and defend against cyberattacks, these IT roles will become increasingly vital to the protection of the nation’s data and people. While some of these are traditional IT jobs, such as network and database administrators, cybersecurity specialists, and computer programmers, other roles are unique to the military environment.

If you’re interested in IT and serving our country, here are four intriguing military IT careers.


1. Cyberwarfare engineer.

The internet is the newest global battlefield. Seemingly everything is on the internet, and powerful entities want to damage their enemies’ vital infrastructure—including power grids and financial systems—through coordinated cyberattacks.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine
Osan aircraft maintainers keep F-16’s ready during RED FLAG

(U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Peter Reft)

According to the U.S. Navy website, cyberwarfare engineers serve on the front lines by defending networks, searching for vulnerabilities in our enemies’ computer infrastructure, and developing systems that can exploit these vulnerabilities. They facilitate tactical operations through software development and programming, and they protect financial, personal, and governmental data from falling into the wrong hands.

Defense News reports that the base salary for this role is around ,000 a year, but it comes with various government benefits. It also notes that the U.S. Navy is hiring cyberwarfare engineers in an effort to “build a more informed and skilled software engineering cadre.” If you have a bachelor’s degree in or computer engineering and want to use your skills to defend the country, a career as a cyberwarfare engineer could be right for you.

2. Geospatial imaging officer.

Successful operations rely on understanding as much as possible about the location of enemy defenses, the surrounding terrain, nearby resources, and other information. According to Careers in the Military, geospatial imaging officers collect and analyze geospatial data from multiple sources, such as satellite imagery, topographical information, and other geographic intelligence, and they use this data to plan, organize, and execute tactical on-the-ground operations.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

(U.S. Navy Photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Sabrina Fine)

According to MyFuture, the average yearly salary for geospatial imaging officers is about ,000, and about 40 percent of professionals in this role have at least a bachelor’s degree. If you’re interested in geospatial technology and strategic defense, you might find a career as a geospatial imaging officer rewarding.

3. Intelligence specialist.

Today’s Military reports that intelligence specialists play a critical role in ensuring that military operations are planned using the most accurate and up-to-date information available about enemy forces and capabilities. IT specialists oversee the collection, production, analysis, and distribution of intelligence data to key military leaders and consumers.

Intelligence specialists have civilian-world counterparts in data scientists and research analysts. Candidates who are interested in this career should have strong analytical skills and an interest in computers, among other attributes. The average salary is about ,000 a year, according to Today’s Military, but intelligence officers with four-year degrees can earn much more—about ,000, on average.

4. Unmanned vehicle operations specialist.

The military uses unmanned vehicles to conduct remote surveillance, gather intelligence, attack targets, and explore dangerous terrain like the deep sea, among other applications. It needs skilled personnel to operate and maintain these vehicles, and that’s where unmanned vehicle operations specialists come in.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

(U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Joseph M. Buliavac)

These specialists use their background in computer science, programming, and systems administration to maneuver unmanned vehicles. On average, they make about ,000 a year, according to Today’s Military. If you like programming and operating robotic devices, this career might be for you.

As these positions illustrate, there are many ways to combine an interest in technology with the call of duty.

This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @militarydotcom on Twitter.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

The best naval air-defense system just went ashore

The major surface combatants in the United States Navy (plus a number of ships in foreign navies) use the Aegis combat system. Centered around the AN/SPY-1 radar, this system has been used to protect the United States Navy’s aircraft carriers from aerial threats. But this system is now being used to protect more valuable things – on land – like your city.


Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

The Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruiser USS Lake Erie (CG 70) launches a RIM-161 SM-3 surface-to-air missile.

(U.S. Navy photo)

According to materials obtained at the 2018 SeaAirSpace expo in National Harbor, Maryland, one active-duty system is already active in Romania — and by the end of this year a second system will be active in Poland. These systems use the RIM-156 Standard SM-2 Extended Range Block IV missile, the RIM-161 Standard SM-3, and the RIM-174 Standard SM-6 Extended Range Active Missile.

The primary missile is the RIM-161. This missile has already proven it can hit targets in orbit – one was used by the Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruiser USS Lake Erie (CG 70) to shoot down an errant satellite in 2008. The missile is designed primarily for the anti-ballistic missile role, and is designed to secure a direct impact on targets.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

A RIM-161 SM-3 launches from a Mk41 vertical launch system.

(Missile Defense Agency photo)

Japan has also acquired Aegis Ashore to protect against North Korean missiles. The system has been involved in 46 tests, and has succeeded 37 times, an 80.4 percent success rate against ballistic targets. With a track record like this, it’s hard to understand why Aegis Ashore is not being placed on land in the United States.

This has not been a new development. A number of U.S. Navy ships – and some Japanese ships – with Aegis have been modified to shoot down ballistic missiles. But Aegis is also going ashore for active duty, protecting against the threat of ballistic missiles. This seems to be a very natural approach, after all. Much research and development has already been done on the system, and it’s easy to train personnel to use it.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

This is Communist China’s heavy attack helicopter

Attack helicopters are a vital part of any modern military. They carry enough weapons to knock out a company of enemy tanks – or more – and also can do in infantry, support vehicles, and even other helicopters. The AH-64 Apache is one of the best in the world, but other countries have them, too.


One is Communist China, which developed the Z-19 light attack/observation helicopter. But these light choppers, while they carry anti-tank missiles, are designed to be scouts. They locate the enemy force and try to get a sense of what is protecting it. But to be a good scout requires one type of design. To carry heavy firepower, a different design is needed.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

The Z-10 packs a power punch against tanks, helicopters, and other targets.

(Photo by Peng Chen)

Well, the ChiComs decided to go for a heavy attack chopper, after trying to make a copy of the French AS.365 Dauphin work (it didn’t). So, they began trying to design one, which would become the Z-10, but ultimately had to turn to the Russian firm Kamov to get it right.

The resulting helicopter is not quite at the level of the Apache. Still, it has a top speed of 186 miles per hour, a maximum range of 510 miles, and a crew of two. While the Apache has one primary anti-tank missile, the Z-10 has three: the HJ-8, the HJ-9, and the HJ-10. The Z-10 is also capable of using rockets and can also fire PL-7 air-to-air missiles.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

Two views of the Z-10 attack helicopter.

(Graphic by Stingray, the Helicopter Guy)

Like the Apache, it has an internal gun. However, this chopper also offers a choice between a 23mm cannon (similar to that used on the MiG-23 Flogger and other Soviet jets), a 30mm cannon, a 14.5mm Gatling gun, or even a 40mm automatic grenade launcher.

The ChiComs have 106 of these choppers in service and another 12 on order, according to FlightGlobal.com. Pakistan is also buying this helicopter. Learn more about Communist China’s main tank-killing chopper in the video below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiZjrErRf1k

www.youtube.com

MIGHTY CULTURE

Navy SEAL brains are trained to alter how they process fear

Imagine how long it takes to reprogram millions of years of evolution in the human brain, trying to snuff out the instincts that kept early humans alive. Forcibly changing those instincts to instead train an individual to put themselves in harm’s way. If you ask a Navy SEAL, he’ll tell it takes about about six months, give or take — the amount of time you need to get through BUD/S.


If it ever seemed like SEALs and SEAL veterans just tend to think differently than most other civilians and veterans, then you’re on to something. Their brains have actually been reprogrammed, specifically within the amygdala, to process fear differently from everyone else.

Fear is a primal instinct that kept a lot of early humans from becoming food for dire wolves and cave hyenas. These days, humans have fewer cave hyenas to worry about, but that instinct still keeps us from walking down a dark alley in a tough neighborhood at night. Fear helps us manage risk and book it out of a situation that overwhelms us. The part of the brain that processes fear is the amygdala, which actually processes all emotions.

With fear present, the amygdala alerts the brain stem, which causes you to sweat, causes your heart to race, and initiates your body’s “fight or flight” response. The amygdala’s emotional response process is twice as fast as the frontal lobe’s logical decision-making processes.

Humans, as it turns out, are emotional creatures. The Navy takes full advantage of that.

“We introduce our students, on day one, to absolute chaos,” Capt. Roger Herbert, then-commander of the SEAL training program at Coronado Island, told the History Channel. “When you look at historic mistakes on the battlefield, they’re almost always associated with fear and panic. So, the capacity to control these impulses is extremely important.”
Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

Petty Officer 1st Class Zack Schaffer, U.S. Navy SEAL and an advanced training instructor, engages targets during a close quarters defense hooded-box drill at Naval Special Warfare Advanced Training Command. The drill tests operators’ ability to quickly react to lethal and non-lethal threats with the appropriate use of force. Individual augmentees are used as role players during each scenario.

(U.S. Navy Photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Michelle Kapica)

Navy SEAL recruits are put through special training to change how their brains react to fear. The Navy wanted to know why lifelong athletes could fail BUD/S training while some kids who never saw the ocean before the Navy could succeed.

One close-quarters combat exercise, the hooded box drill, involves putting a hood on a SEAL candidate that renders them blind and deaf, and then putting them in a combat situation. The hood is then ripped off and the candidate has to respond in seconds.

Sometimes, the response needs to be lethal and sometimes it needs to be nonviolent. Panic is not an option. Constant exposure to fear results in experiencing suppressed emotional responses and less lag time between the fear response and the frontal lobe logic process.

A gap between the two responses could leave a special operator standing frozen, unable to respond, not knowing what to do next. Navy SEALs do not have this problem.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

This tank is the backbone of the Russian Army

We hear a lot about the T-14 Armata and the T-90, some of Russia’s latest designs. But neither of these tanks, historically, has served as the backbone of the Russian Army. Let’s face facts: Most of the T-90 production has been for export — India is arguably the world’s biggest operator of the T-90 — and the T-14 is still, technically, in development. That means that the most modern tank that the Russians can operate in significant numbers is still the T-80.


This late-Soviet-era tank was produced in multiple locations, some of which are in what is now Russia and others in what is now Ukraine. Russia has around 4,500 of these tanks on hand, either in active service or in reserve. Russia may have more T-72s currently, but, frankly, the T-72 is an overhyped piece of junk.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine
A Soviet T-80 main battle tank on maneuvers. (DOD photo)

The T-80 is a much-improved version of the T-64. The T-80 has a top speed of 43 miles per hour and can go 273 miles on a single tank of gas. It also has a crew of three, like most Soviet tanks, but uses an auto-loader as opposed to a 19-year-old grunt to feed the gun.

It’s armed with a pair of anti-tank missiles, the AT-8 Songster and the AT-11 Sniper, that can be fired from its 125mm gun. The tank also has a 12.7mm anti-aircraft gun and a 7.62mm machine gun. This all sounds good, but this is virtually the same gun that couldn’t penetrate an Abrams at 400 yards. The usual load is 36 rounds for the gun and five AT-8s.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine
A Soviet T-80 tank with reactive armor. The tank performed poorly in the First Chechen War. (DOD photo)

The T-80 saw action in the First Chechen War — but woefully underperformed. As many as 200 tanks were lost in the city of Grozny alone. That didn’t stop the tank from being exported, however, especially as former Soviet republics fell into a cash crunch (South Korea even bought some).

Learn more about the mainstay of Russia’s task force in the video below:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mcxcvfy0OSQ
popular

These are the jets Iran would use to fight the US

After forty years of sanctions and arms embargoes, Iran’s air force has slowly become an eclectic mishmash of aging platforms sourced through various channels. If war were to break out between Iran and the United States today, U.S. pilots would find themselves squaring off with Iranian pilots in a swarm of old American, Soviet, and Chinese jets. Some of these planes, like the Northrop F-5 Tiger II, have seen update efforts over the years. Others, however, are thought to be barely sky-worthy.


While there’s little doubt that advanced American fighters like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or the F-22 Raptor would have a long list of advantages over Iran’s ragtag fighters, that isn’t to say that the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force lacks any teeth whatsoever. In fact, some of Iran’s jets actually boast capabilities that would put even America’s fifth-generation fighters to shame.

Of course, combat isn’t about who can put the best numbers on paper, and even Iran’s best jets likely wouldn’t even see the American fighter that put them down until long after they pulled their ejection seat levers, but America’s pilots should remain cautious: Some of Iran’s jets were actually the best America had to offer at one point. While Iran has more than a dozen combat-aircraft in service (in varying numbers), these are some of the first aircraft American pilots might run across in a war with Iran.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine
Iranian Air Force Grumman F-14A Tomcats in 1986 (WikiMedia Commons)

 

Iran’s Top Gun: The Grumman F-14 Tomcat

Prior to Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, the United States was working hand in hand with the nation’s monarch, even agreeing to sell them 80 of the U.S. Navy’s top tier intercept fighters, the F-14 Tomcat. A total of 79 of these jets were delivered. With a top speed of Mach 2.34 and a combat radius of 500 miles, these air superiority fighters are faster and carry more weapons than America’s fifth-generation fighters like the F-35.

Iran claims to have upgraded two F-14s to F-14AMs since then and says 24 of the fighters are mission capable, though that seems unlikely. The U.S. has gone to great lengths to stop Iran from getting F-14 parts (even shredding our own retired platforms), which means Iran has had to cannibalize parts off some jets to keep others in the air. Even if their F-14s are operational, their pilots almost certainly have limited flight time with them–meaning this “Top Gun” dogfight likely wouldn’t be as dramatic as the movies.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine
Mig-29 being operated by the German Air Force (USAF Photo taken by TSGT Michael Ammons)

 

Russian Steel: The Mig-29

Rounding out Iran’s air intercept fighter numbers are as many as 30 operational Mikoyan Mig-29 Fulcrums. These fighters were sourced in small numbers through Russia and as a result of Iraqi pilots fleeing destruction from American forces during 1991’s Operation Desert Storm.

With a top speed of Mach 2.25, these fighters are also faster than America’s stealth platforms, though, like the F-14, the Mig-29 would lose a drag race to America’s F-15. With seven hardpoints for air-to-air missiles, these Migs were purpose built to stand and fight with America’s fourth-generation fighters (like the aforementioned F-15 and the F-16 Fighting Falcon). Iran has reportedly updated these platforms to support Nasr-1 anti-ship missiles as well, making them a concern for the U.S. Navy in waterways like the Strait of Hormuz.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine
If these pictures look old, just imagine how old the planes themselves must be. (WikiMedia Commons)

 

Iran’s “Home-built” Fighter: The Northrop F-5 Tiger II

In August of this year, Iran’s president Hassan Rouhani sat in the cockpit of what he described as the nation’s new “home-built” fourth generation fighter… the thing is, the fighter was neither new nor home-built. Rouhani was posing with a Northrop F-5F — a platform Iran had purchased from the United States more than forty years ago. It is presumed, however, that these jets have received a good deal of updating over the years, much of which was concocted internally. Iran’s truly home-built HESA Saeqeh is based on reverse engineered F-5s as well, despite first taking to the skies in 2007.

Unbeknownst to many, the Northrop F-5 also appeared in 1986’s “Top Gun,” as both the menacing (and fictional) Mig-28 and as an aggressor aircraft utilized by instructors at the Top Gun school. It’s believed that Iran maintains a fleet of 60 operational F-5s in varying trims (mostly F-5Es fighter bombers along with around 16 F-5F dual seat training fighters), making it one of Iran’s workhorse platforms. With a maximum speed of Mach 1.6, seven total hardpoints for missiles or bombs, and a great deal of maneuverability, these long-dated platforms are still capable of causing a good amount of trouble.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine
Su-22 operated by the Czech Republic (WikiMedia Commons)

 

Iraqi Leftovers: The Su-22 Fitter

As American F-15s headed in Iraqi airspace to kick off the Persian Gulf War in 1991, more than 40 Iraqi Su-22 fighter bombers frantically took to the sky. They weren’t looking to engage the inbound Eagles, however… they were running for their lives. American fighters brought down two, but the rest managed to make it into Iranian airspace. Some crash landed, some came down gently, but few were considered operable once they reached the tarmac.

It didn’t take long for Iran to claim these (and nearly a hundred other Iraqi aircraft) as their own, but making their newfound Su-22 fighter bombers sky-worthy again proved a lengthy (and costly) undertaking. Nearly 30 years after the already-dated jets arrived in Iran, it’s believed that something like 20 of these jets are operational today. Ten have even seen significant upgrades that allow them to carry precision-guided munitions and share data with nearby drones. These Fitters would pose little threat to American fighters, but would likely be relied on to engage ground forces instead, alongside their small number of Su-25 Grachs.

MIGHTY CULTURE

How to make good coffee in bad places, according to Evan Hafer

Making coffee isn’t strictly relegated to your kitchen or the local coffee shop. People around the world find ways to enjoy a hot brew in high-altitude mountains to the middle of the ocean, and everywhere in-between. A good cup of coffee can make inhospitable conditions more tolerable, but the quality in your cup often suffers without the trappings of your home coffee kit.

Evan Hafer, the CEO of Black Rifle Coffee Company, found a way to make great coffee in one of the most extreme environments on earth: war.


Hafer served as both a U.S. Army Special Forces non-commissioned officer (NCO) and a contractor for the CIA, with assignments that took him to combat zones around the world. Even during the invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003, he found a way to grind and brew his daily dose of caffeine — without sacrificing quality.

Coffee or Die Magazine caught up with Hafer recently to find out about his battle-tested methods for making good coffee in bad places.

It’s Who We Are: Evan Hafer

www.youtube.com

Take good coffee beans with you.

During the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Hafer took premium coffee with him, and his fellow Special Forces teammates often woke up to the sound of a coffee grinder on the back of their gun truck. “I think we were probably the only ODA to take whole bean, good coffee with us. In the mornings, we would always start the day by grinding fresh coffee,” Hafer said. He recommends finding single-origin, high-altitude beans — he prefers Panamanian or Colombian.

Roast your own beans.

By 2006, Hafer was deploying with the CIA but was surprised to find that the coffee options left a bit to be desired: “You’d think the agency, especially with their kind of gucci reputation, would have amazing coffee. But they didn’t.” So he started roasting in his garage and bringing a duffel bag’s worth of beans overseas with him for his 60-day deployments.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

Hafer while deployed.

(Photo courtesy of Black Rifle Coffee Company)

A french press is good, but pour over is better.

“I did the french press for a long time, until I had broken so many,” Hafer said. “I eventually found a double-walled, stainless steel one and went through quite a few of those because people would literally steal them, they were in such high demand.” These days, Hafer doesn’t leave home without a custom travel pour-over system that he invented that is much more compact than a french press and has simple, durable components.

How to Make Coffee with BRCC Collapsible Pour Over Coffee Device

www.youtube.com

Know the boiling point for the altitude you’ll be at.

You typically want your water to be about 200 degrees Fahrenheit before pouring it over the ground coffee, but deciphering water temperature might seem tricky if you don’t have a thermometer. “I know roughly what temperature water is going to boil at based on the elevation; it’s either going to boil faster or slower,” Hafer said. “You don’t have to put a thermometer in it because you’ll know exactly what the temperature is based on the boiling point.” When planning your next trip, go to omnicalculator.com to quickly find the boiling point for your intended elevation.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

Hafer while deployed.

(Photo courtesy of Black Rifle Coffee Company)

Get the right coffee-to-water ratio.

According to Hafer, you want approximately a 1:16 ratio of coffee to water. This roughly breaks down to 1 tablespoon of ground coffee for every one cup of coffee (8 ounces). “I know that by eye because I’ve been doing it for so many years. It’s what you do every day [at home] that will allow you to master making coffee in the field,” Hafer said. “All that skill translates to when you’re in shitty places.”

Don’t be intimidated by the process.

As much as the science and logistics of making a great cup of coffee might deter the average person from going through the effort in austere environments, Hafer emphasized that it’s all very doable — and will only take 10 minutes of your time. “At the end of the day, if you have a hand grinder or maybe you’ve pre-ground some coffee, you got an indestructible pour-over and a means to boil water, you’re gonna make a great cup of coffee.”

This article originally appeared on Coffee or Die. Follow @CoffeeOrDieMag on Twitter.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

US nuclear warheads face a $1 billion setback, thanks to a $5 part

An official with the National Nuclear Security Administration told lawmakers that a $5 commercial capacitor it had tested for the Navy’s W88 submarine-launched missile and the Air Force’s B61-12 bomb was insufficient, causing delays in the upgrades and driving up the cost by as much as $1 billion, USNI reports.

Charles Verdon, deputy administrator for defense programs at the NNSA, explained that early testing indicated that the $5 commercial, off-the-shelf capacitors would have served their purpose in the short term, but didn’t withstand the stress that decades of wear — 30 years or so — would put on them.


“Early tests on the capacitors now in question and subsequent tests including component, major assembly and full-up integrated system flight tests demonstrated that these components meet requirement today,” Verdon told the House Armed Service Committee strategic forces subcommittee on Sept. 25, 2019. “Industry best practices were used to stress the components beyond their design planned usage as a way to establish confidence that they will continue to work over the necessary lifetime of the warhead.”

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

(United States Department of Defense)

“During stress testing, a few of these commercially available capacitors did not meet the reliability requirements.”

Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, the under secretary for Nuclear Security and administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, disclosed the faulty parts at a subcommittee hearing in May 2019, Nuclear Security and Deterrence Monitor reported at the time.

The NNSA originally estimated the upgrade cost for the W88 to be between .4 billion and .1 billion, and for upgrades to be delivered in December 2019. The NNSA budgeted between .3 and .5 billion for B61 refurbishment. But the failure of the capacitor could cost both projects up to id=”listicle-2640638602″ billion combined, USNI reports. The W88 is used with Trident II D5 submarine-launched ballistic missile, and an inert B61-12 gravity bomb was dropped from a B-2 Spirit stealth bomber in March 2019.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Bennie J. Davis III)

Instead of using the capacitor, the NNSA will use capacitors built to its requirements, which will cost per unit.

Despite the delays, Verdon believes that the entire upgrade program will come out in the balance, according to Defense News, because the program has a cushion of funding for delays, and the setbacks from the W88 and B61-12 upgrades will yield “design simplifications” for upcoming refurbishments to the 80-4 and W87-1, decreasing costs in the long run.

But in terms of readiness for near-term deployments, it’s not clear how the forces will be affected by the delay. The US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) and the Navy are working together to determine the effect of the delay, USNI reports.

Insider reached out to the Navy’s strategic systems programs, as well as STRATCOM, regarding short-term mission readiness. The Navy did not respond to request for comment, and STRATCOM was unable to give answers to the questions by publication time. The NNSA was unable to furnish answers to Insider’s questions on Sept. 26, 2019

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

All-female Air Force team wins bomb-building competition

The first all-female team to compete in the Rapid Aircraft Generation and Employment competition at Aviano Air Base, Italy, took home the win, the Air Force announced last week. And they did it while wearing costumes that paid tribute to Rosie the Riveter.

The RAGE contest began last October to highlight several adaptive basing procedures and is being held quarterly. Last year, a team named “Wing it” won.


The Bouncing Bettys, the six-airman team that won Jan. 7, 2020, was from the 31st Munition Squadron and the 731st Munition Squadron. The team members overcame six evaluated events: a written test, stockpile practices, trailer configuration, trailer re-configuration, 463L palletization and a weapons build.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

Senior Airman Audrey M. Naputi, a munition inspector from the 731st Munition Squadron, sits and prepares for the Rapid Aircraft Generation and Employment competition to begin at Aviano Air Base, Italy, Jan. 7, 2020.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Ericka A. Woolever)

One of the competitions had them conduct an inert bomb build.

Named after M16 land mines, the team was made up of two munitions inspectors, two stockpile management technicians, a munition control supervisor and a noncommissioned officer in charge of the 31st MUNS conventional munitions support.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

U.S Airmen from the 31st Munition Squadron and the 731 Munition Squadron compete at the Rapid Aircraft Generation and Employment competition at Aviano Air Base, Italy, Jan. 7, 2020.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Ericka A. Woolever)

It was the idea of Air Force Staff. Sgt. Ana L. Merkel, a munitions inspector, to have the team dress as Women Ordnance Workers — the iconic image of Rosie the Riveter — and highlight the “impact females have on Sortie generations,” an Air Force news release noted.

Wearing dark blue jumpsuits, a brown belt and signature red bandanas with white polka dots, the women hoped to honor those who “paved the way” by working in manufacturing during World War I and World War II, the release said.

In honor of their win, the women will have their names etched on plaques to be displayed at the unit.

This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @militarydotcom on Twitter.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Here’s what we know about China’s dangerous ‘carrier killer’ missile

China offered an unprecedented look at its new DF-26 “carrier killer” missile in a video seen by military experts as a direct warning to US aircraft carriers that they’re in danger of being sunk.

The footage of the DF-26 broke with norms in several ways. China strictly controls its media, and any data on a its ballistic missiles or supporting infrastructure amounts to military intelligence for the US, which considers China a leading rival.


And a close look at the video reveals a capable weapon with several strengths and features that seriously threaten the US Navy’s entire operating concept.

Analysts who spoke with the South China Morning Post about the video concluded that the video sought to strike fear into the US by showing a fully functional, confident Chinese rocket brigade loading and firing the missile that the country said can sink US Navy ships as far away as Guam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZMvtqtHVf4
Tension High: China Tests DF 26 Carrier-Killer Missile, Shoulde Navy Be Worrie

www.youtube.com

China has increasing its threats against the US Navy for sailing in international waters near its territory, with a rear admiral even calling for China to sink US aircraft carriers.

Many in the US dismissed the Chinese naval academic’s talk as bluster, but China went through with deploying the missiles and showed them off in the video.

“This is the first time, to my knowledge, the DF-26 has really been materially visible in any video,” Scott LaFoy, an open-source missile analyst at ArmsControlWonk.com tweeted in response to the video. “This sort of imagery wasn’t released for literally decades with the DF-21!” he continued, referencing China’s earlier, shorter-range “carrier killer” missile type.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

The DF-26 warhead revealed.

(CCTV / YouTube)

What we know about the missile

The DF-26 has a known range of 1,860 to 3,500 miles, putting much of China’s near periphery in range, along with much of the US military’s Pacific basing and infrastructure.

With at least a 2,500-pound throw weight, China can use the missile to carry conventional, nuclear, or anti-ship warheads.

First off, the missile is road-mobile, meaning that if the US sought to kill the missiles before they’re fired, they’d likely be able to run and hide.

Second, the missile is solid-fueled. This means the missile has fuel already inside it. When North Korea launched its intercontinental-ballistic-missile prototypes in 2017, it used liquid fuels.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

The ranges of Chinese ballistic and cruise missiles, air-defense systems, and warships.

(Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments)

Liquid-fueled missiles must take fuel before the launch, which for road-mobile missiles, requires a large team of fueling and support trucks. The long convoy makes the mobile missiles easier to track and would give the US about 30 minutes to hunt the missile down.

Third, the missile is cold-launched, according to LaFoy. This makes a minor difference, but essentially allows the missile to maximize its range by relying on compressed gas to eject it from the tube to get it going, rather than a powerful blast of fuel.

Submarines, for example, shoot cold-launched missiles near the surface before letting their engines rip.

Finally, according to LaFoy’s close analysis of the launch, the DF-26 may carry field reloads, or essentially get close to rapid fire — which could allow China’s batteries to overwhelm a carrier’s robust defensive systems.

If the DF-26 units carry with them additional rounds and operate as portrayed in the video, China may truly have a weapon that they can confidently show off knowing the US can scrutinize it but likely not defeat it.

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

The Army’s top 4 future weapons for destroying Russian forces

The US Army wants guns, big ones. The service is modernizing for high-intensity combat against top adversaries, and one of the top priorities is long-range precision fires.

The goal of the Long-Range Precision Fires team is to pursue range overmatch against peer and near-peer competitors, Col. John Rafferty, the team’s director of the LRPF who is part of the recently-established Army Futures Command, told reporters Oct. 10, 2018, at the Association of the United States Army conference in Washington, DC.

The Army faces challenges from a variety of Russian weapons systems, such as the artillery, multiple rocket launcher systems, and integrated air defense networks. While the Army is preparing for combat against a wide variety of adversaries, Russia is characterized as a “pacing threat,” one which has, like China, invested heavily in standoff capabilities designed to keep the US military at arms length in a fight.


The US armed forces aim to engage enemy in multi-domain operations, which involves assailing the enemy across the five domains of battle: land, air, sea, space, and cyberspace. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said the US desires “a perfect harmony of intense violence.”

Rafferty described LRPF’s efforts as “fundamental to the success of multi-domain operations,” as these efforts get at the “fundamental problem of multi-domain operations, which is one of access.”

“Our purpose is to penetrate and disintegrate enemy anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) systems, which will enable us to maintain freedom of maneuverability as we exploit windows of opportunity,” he added.

Long-range hypersonic weapon and strategic long-range cannon

At the strategic fires level, the Army is developing a long-range hypersonic weapon and a strategic long-range cannon that could conceptually fire on targets over 1,000 miles away.

With these two systems, the Army is “taking a comprehensive approach to the A2/AD problem, one by using the hypersonic system against strategic infrastructure and hardened targets, and then using the cannon to deliver more of a mass effect with cost-effective, more-affordable projectiles … against the other components of the A2/AD complex.”

The strategic long-range cannon is something that “has never been done before.” This weapon is expected to be big, so much so that Army officials describe it as “relocatable,” not mobile. Having apparently learned from the US Navy’s debacle with the Zumwalt-class destroyer whose projectiles are so expensive the Navy can’t pay for them, the Army is sensitive to the cost-to-kill ratio.

Comparing the Soviet SKS rifle to the American M1 carbine

The Zumwalt-class destroyer

(U.S. Navy photo)

This cannon is, according to Rafferty, going to be an evolution of existing systems. The Army is “scaling up things that we are already doing.”

Precision Strike Missile 

At the operational level, the Precision Strike Missile features a lot more capability than the weapon it will ultimately replace, the aging Army tactical missile system.

“The first capability that really comes to mind is range, so out to 499 km, which is what we are limited to by the INF Treat,” Rafferty explained.” It will also have space in the base missile to integrate additional capabilities down the road, and those capabilities would involve sensors to go cross-domain on different targets or loitering munitions or sensor-fused munitions that would give greater lethality at much longer ranges.”

Extended Range Cannon Artillery 

At the tactical level, the Army is pushing ahead on the Extended Range Cannon Artillery, “which takes our current efforts to modernize the Paladin and replaces the turret and the cannon tube with a new family of projectiles that will enable us to get out to 70 km,” the colonel told reporters. “We see 70 km as really the first phase of this. We really want to get out to 120 and 130 km.”

And there is the technology out there to get the Army to this range. One of the most promising technologies, Rafferty introduced, is an air-breathing Ramjet projectile, although the Army could also go with a solid rocket motor.

The Army has already doubled its range from the 30 km range of the M777 Howitzer to the 62 miles with the new ERCA system, Gen. John Murray, the first head of Army Futures Command, revealed in October 2018, pointing to the testing being done out at the Yuma proving grounds in Arizona.

“We are charged to achieve overmatch at echelon that will enable us to realize multi-domain operations by knocking down the systems that are designed to create standoff and separate us,” Rafferty said. “Long-range fire is key to reducing the enemy’s capability to separate our formations. It does that from a position of advantage.”

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

Do Not Sell My Personal Information