Sentinel ICBM will need mostly new Silos...

[Calder]

I am starting to lean toward just getting rid of the land based ballistic missile leg of the Triad. 90% of its mission can be performed by the Ballistic missile submarines and they have capabilities that the land-based missiles don't have. Bombers can be the backup to the Navy, and bombers can perform non-nuclear missions that the other two can't.

I would rather spend the money on conventional forces.

I'd agree with this if the funding was shifted to maintenance for the Navy, get those ships out of the ditch they're in, but the USAF would do everything in their power to prevent that.

I think we need to realize that we can't be the best in everything anymore. The rate of "inflation" for high-end military equipment is just so much higher than are overall economy, it is just too large to continue doing it this way. The old Air Force joke about how aircraft are getting so expensive that we are soon only going to produce a single fighter that will be used by the Air Force on even days, Navy on odd days, and by the Marines on every leap year day.

Tell the Air Force they can have a single leg of the triad. They can have new B-21 Raiders or new ICBM, but not both. I trust the Bomber Barons and the Fighter Mafia enough to know which one they are going to pick.

[Nightwatch2]

I am starting to lean toward just getting rid of the land based ballistic missile leg of the Triad. 90% of its mission can be performed by the Ballistic missile submarines and they have capabilities that the land-based missiles don't have. Bombers can be the backup to the Navy, and bombers can perform non-nuclear missions that the other two can't.

I would rather spend the money on conventional forces.

I'd agree with this if the funding was shifted to maintenance for the Navy, get those ships out of the ditch they're in, but the USAF would do everything in their power to prevent that.

I think we need to realize that we can't be the best in everything anymore. The rate of "inflation" for high-end military equipment is just so much higher than are overall economy, it is just too large to continue doing it this way. The old Air Force joke about how aircraft are getting so expensive that we are soon only going to produce a single fighter that will be used by the Air Force on even days, Navy on odd days, and by the Marines on every leap year day.

Tell the Air Force they can have a single leg of the triad. They can have new B-21 Raiders or new ICBM, but not both. I trust the Bomber Barons and the Fighter Mafia enough to know which one they are going to pick.

There is a lot to be said for using a common missile between the SLBM and ICBM legs of the Triad. HOWEVER what the land based leg brings isn't all that much over the sea based.

yea, I don't think we can afford it all

[Poohbah]

I am starting to lean toward just getting rid of the land based ballistic missile leg of the Triad. 90% of its mission can be performed by the Ballistic missile submarines and they have capabilities that the land-based missiles don't have. Bombers can be the backup to the Navy, and bombers can perform non-nuclear missions that the other two can't.

I would rather spend the money on conventional forces.

I'd agree with this if the funding was shifted to maintenance for the Navy, get those ships out of the ditch they're in, but the USAF would do everything in their power to prevent that.

I think we need to realize that we can't be the best in everything anymore. The rate of "inflation" for high-end military equipment is just so much higher than are overall economy, it is just too large to continue doing it this way. The old Air Force joke about how aircraft are getting so expensive that we are soon only going to produce a single fighter that will be used by the Air Force on even days, Navy on odd days, and by the Marines on every leap year day.

Tell the Air Force they can have a single leg of the triad. They can have new B-21 Raiders or new ICBM, but not both. I trust the Bomber Barons and the Fighter Mafia enough to know which one they are going to pick.

We can afford it. We can't afford it plus all of the other BS money sinks the left has inflicted on the DoD.

[Rocket J Squrriel]

I'd agree with this if the funding was shifted to maintenance for the Navy, get those ships out of the ditch they're in, but the USAF would do everything in their power to prevent that.

I think we need to realize that we can't be the best in everything anymore. The rate of "inflation" for high-end military equipment is just so much higher than are overall economy, it is just too large to continue doing it this way. The old Air Force joke about how aircraft are getting so expensive that we are soon only going to produce a single fighter that will be used by the Air Force on even days, Navy on odd days, and by the Marines on every leap year day.

Tell the Air Force they can have a single leg of the triad. They can have new B-21 Raiders or new ICBM, but not both. I trust the Bomber Barons and the Fighter Mafia enough to know which one they are going to pick.

There is a lot to be said for using a common missile between the SLBM and ICBM legs of the Triad. HOWEVER what the land based leg brings isn't all that much over the sea based.

yea, I don't think we can afford it all

That's one I've been wondering about. Take a Trident D5 and stick a Peacekeeper 1st stage on to it. Use an extended launch tube from the subs and go from there.

[Nik_SpeakerToCats]

Back to the refurb issues...

When a chunk of our Pharma site was being up-graded, they had terrible problems with 'fire-resistant' cabling. This was the stuff run inside a 'sand-filled' tube. Actually a fine silica powder, IIRC.

It is hard enough to install correctly, my 'Sparky' BIL told nape-crinkling tales of such 'Done Wrong'...

IIRC, like old copper pipe, it becomes significantly less flexible with age, so has a nasty habit of spilling the silica powder if it snaps. Or you begin to modify / remove it...

Silicosis alert !!!

Precautions approached finding 'White or Blue Asbestos' in the walls...