Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Win Smith who wrote (32866)	6/21/2002 4:44:30 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 281500

Win from your link jerrypournelle.com "Here's why Hellfire was chosen over FOGM in the 1970s. a. Hellfire had a designed range of 18 kilometers, compared to FOGM's then and still current 10km. Since the Hellfire range was classified (public references only said "in excess of 3750 meters") outsiders were confused. They didn't know it was going to be 5 TIMES in excess. This range of course put the AH-64 (Attack Helicopter 64) Apache well outside the current and 20 year projected Soviet SHORAD (Short Range Air Defense) umbrella. You know the 'upsided down wedding cake' model for ADA (Air Defense Artillery) coverage. b. Hellfire, as a LOS (line of sight) laser designated weapon had a guidance package about the same price as the FOGM TV (television) package promised. But FOGM has to carry all its optics with it, and they're destroyed with each round. Apache carried all the computers, thermal sights (very expensive and still large back n the 1970s), IR etc with it in its TAADS package (Target Acquisition And Designation System). FOG-M therefore would only be a daylight VFR (Visual Flight Rules) weapon with about 60% of Hellfire's range. FOGM accuracy didn't promise to be nearly as good, either. The TAADS is stabilized in 2 axes. In the 1970s the computer technology simply didn't exist to enhance the returned FOGM picture back and stabilize it. TV guided bombs are released at targets known to exist and whose location is well fixed. FOGM has to acquire its targets during its cruise, and the cruise time is limited. The vast advances in computer technology since the 1970s have resolved most of this problem, of course. Advances in optics technology have improved the raw picture, reduced the seeker package price and increased the night/low visibility capabilities. c. FOGM is an indirect fire weapon and therefore ground mounted. The shorter range FOG-M package rolling on wheels simply wouldn't give division and corps commanders the capability to RAPIDLY mass decisive anti-tank fires at the criticial point, at least not like the AH-64 Apache . The whole AH-64 organization stays outside the range of enemy artillery. Apache rearms/refuels outside enemy artillery and quickly shuttles in. Although we pushed AH-64 battalions down to division, this organization was subject to detachment by the Corps commander at a moment's notice. With two divisions' AH-64 battalions, plus three more at Corps level, the Corps commander had the theoretical capability to mass 5 x 18 = 90 Apaches x 16 Hellfires = 1,440 Hellfires at a threatened breakthrough. Casualties and serviceability rates would reduce this optimal number, but there in a nutshell is how Generals Meyer &; Starry planned to DESTROY (not 'attrit', 'delay', or 'stop') an invading Warsaw Pact force. FOGM then and even now doesn't promise that kind of battlefield decisiveness. General Meyer was not kidding when he told Congress in 1980 that if they cancelled the Apache he would have to redesign the entire U.S. Army. There was never any chance of massing shorter range, less accurate FOGMs on wheels that way. Apache could redeploy in 30 minutes. FOGM might make it in half a day, depending on the condition of the lateral road network. The deeper FOGM wants to penetrate the closer it has to come to the enemy's forward elements, meaning it becomes vulnerable to artillery, unless you put it inside a track. " Also "The place where we're really missing out is SMALLER FOG-M's for the infantry. The trick that was done with the TOW could also be done with a much smaller rocket about the size of the old M-72A2 LAW (Light Anti-Tank Weapon). Small FOGMs will displace mortars from the TOE (Table of Organization and Equipment). Cheap rockets with cameras, fibre optic cables and parachutes will be an excellent tactical intelligence tool for light infantry companies and platoons. A computer mounted on a track, HMMWV (High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle) or even an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle) could rapidly process the imagery, giving platoon thru battalion commanders real time on-call aerial reconnaissance and first cut imagery analysis." __ Edit - If FOG-Ms can be built cheaply and in large numbers they would be a good weapon, esp. for countries that can't afford things like Apache's with hellfire missiles but they aren't but I think a $10K FOG-M or similar weapons is not going to happen in the next few years. (Beyond that who knows..) Tim