LRRPF52 said:

If you read through the ODS AAR on Air Power, you see the real pk, CEP, and weapons effects percentages. Nothing is 100%, but it marked a dramatic departure from legacy dumb bomb strikes. Laser-Guided Bombs were introduced in Vietnam, actually first employed in Laos, dropped from F-4Ds. A lot more LGBs were used in SEA than people realize, but the majority of aircraft were not equipped to employ them.

We steadily scaled that capability into the 4th Gen fighters that were multirole, while it was baseline on the F-111F and immediately expanded into the A-6E, A-7D, and A-7E already in-service. F-16A had some initial Pave Penny LGB delivery capability, but wasn’t all-weather/night capable, so there was a push to develop those night/all-wx capes into the Viper with Block 40 F-16C.

F/A-18 had a lot of this capability as a planned baseline out of the gate, with the FLIR and ATFLIR pods and GBUs, and quickly got Anti-Radiation Missile strike capability for the USN SEAD mission, alongside EA-6Bs.

F-15E was envisioned out of the gate to have the F-111F night/all-wx capes, with a more modern airframe that was easier to maintain and capable of self-escort against potential air threats.

By the time ODS came along, there were enough TACAIR platforms in the total US Air component force structure to deliver a steady barrage of Laser-Guided Bombs at night in adverse weather. The F-111F was the most mature of those systems in ODS, and did an excellent job of eliminating Iraqi Air Force runways, taxiways, parked aircraft in hardened shelters, ammunition bunkers, POL bunkers, then once they serviced all those TGTs, switched to tank-plinking at night in kill boxes. They killed more tanks than A-10s did, in 1/4 the sorties.

Then there was of course the F-117A, which could go downtown inside the Iraqi IADS MEZ and drop 2000lb LGBs wherever it wanted at night.

All of that is really old tech compared to what we have now. We basically took all the best capabilities of all of those platforms, spread a baseline propulsion and sensor package across a single engine design with better stealth than the F-117A, better A2A capabilities than any F-15, better EW capabilities than the supporting EW birds, and started cranking them out en masse, distributing them across the theaters to partner nations, backed by regional USAF and USN forces in the same areas.

Nothing is 100% brochure-advertised, but sometimes the culmination of certain technologies backed by numerical superiority really yields an end-result that might as well be from 100% FMC systems.

So while we saw somewhere between 62-92% positive weapons effects in ODS, even if those numbers stayed the same, the rapid net-centric kill web campaign is still executed much faster than in ODS. And because of what we’ve done with sensors and guidance technology (making it more robust, more reliable, more redundant), the CEPs and pK have incrementally improved with demonstrable effects in the real world.

For small arms, it will be more important to focus on lightweight systems that base defense personnel can employ in the last line of defense against small drones, like what we saw just happen with Ukraine vs Russian strategic bomber bases. The M7 fits nowhere in that capability matrix, and we will see a thorough disinterest in it from USAF SP and base defense leadership, as well as AFSOC personnel who are attached to both conventional and SOF elements in the US Army and US Navy.

US Army should be thinking more along these lines, of how some dismounts assigned or attached to Air Defense, Long-Range Fires, Aviation, and EW units will provide a last-line defense against small FPV or autonomous algorithmic-targeted drones.

The days of US Infantrymen charging hills to take terrain will only be in COIN or JRDF deployments, not LSCO. This has already been true since Korea, so for the last 72 years.

Click to expand...

Aftermath said:

Just pin and weld the brake. No mo sticky to the can.

Click to expand...

Sxiong209 said:

Interested in the mk4 if deal falls through

Click to expand...

FuhQ said:

You’re beyond outnumbered with facts on this one.

Click to expand...

Stangs55 said:

Oh Lordy....if you bail and buy anything, don't buy the Supertricker....I average about 45% throw accuracy.

Or just wait until I get my IP and I'll sell you my ST Apparently, I'm first on the preorder list...Just need one to go out!

Click to expand...

Maggot said:

Thats hits too close to home.

Click to expand...

aprocast said:

DNT is a rebadged Arken

Click to expand...

carbonbased said:

FYI if you are not set on a brake, TBAC makes exactly one CB muzzle device with some wrench flats; this flash hider:
View attachment 8712728

Thunder Beast Arms Corporation [TBAC] | Products | ACCESSORIES

It’s down a ways on that page. I think it’s weird that their other CB muzzle devices don’t have flats.

Edit: upon reflecting, the only reason I can think of for the lack of CB wrench flats is they wanted a “dual use” ability without making the can longer. As in, suppressor QD when leaving the CB device on the gun, and direct thread if you red loctite (or carbon lock) the CB device into the can.

Edit #2: Note that TBAC has told me that the direct thread version of an Ultra 9 is just red loctiting a CB brake in the can. I do think it would’ve been wise to have a thin wrench flat on there anyway.

Click to expand...