The Paradox of Military Technology
Dec. 6th, 2006 09:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thewayneInteresting article, it studies the US military and how it stacks against the rest of the world. Obviously no one else can stand against it in a toe-to-toe slug fest, but equally obviously it isn't very effective against counter-insurgency.
A couple of interesting points in the (LONG!) article: there has not been a US Air Ace (five kills) since 1972! The current USAF heavy bomber, the B-52, ceased production in 1962! And it's still going strong. A minor mistake: they state the AK-47 can fire 100 rounds a minute. Heck, give me a semi-automatic with a belt feed and I can probably come close to that speed. Wikipedia says the actual rate of fire of an AK is 600 rounds a minute. Of course you'll probably melt the barrel if you try that kind of sustained fire.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/14/boot.htm
A couple of interesting points in the (LONG!) article: there has not been a US Air Ace (five kills) since 1972! The current USAF heavy bomber, the B-52, ceased production in 1962! And it's still going strong. A minor mistake: they state the AK-47 can fire 100 rounds a minute. Heck, give me a semi-automatic with a belt feed and I can probably come close to that speed. Wikipedia says the actual rate of fire of an AK is 600 rounds a minute. Of course you'll probably melt the barrel if you try that kind of sustained fire.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/14/boot.htm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-08 05:49 am (UTC)I love the fact that the more complicated our targetting gets, the less complicated our bombs get, so that now we have these big boms that are nothing more than precise targetting systems and concrete.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-10 04:16 pm (UTC)