LRLAP is a modern gyrojet

File: GyroJetCartridge[1].jpg (59KB, 600x635px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 600x635px

>>32187125
>Minchakievich first developed retractable fins after rear ignition proved too dangerous.
>But the retractable fins proved too expensive, requiring advanced machining during production.

Guys let's put fins on a bullet kekekekekekeke

You are just angery because America can afford $800K per shell and China can't. $800K is nothing when it has a hit percent of 1.0 and is literally unstoppable.

>>32187125
It's $400,000 per shot for an initial test run. 800,000 includes R&D, but that's already paid and will never need to be paid again.

>>32187714

we can't afford it though. That's why the navy ditched it.

No, because rocket assisted rounds are extremely common in artillery

>>32189120
No. They are not you dumb faggot. They are called base bleed rounds and merely provide a small amount to of gas pressure behind the shell, reducing drag and increasing range.

>>32189173
I don't quite know how to tell you this, but both base bleed rounds and rocket assisted rounds are extremely common, and I knew they were not the same thing, which is why I said "rocket assisted" and not "base bleed"

>>32189173

Base bleed and rocket-assist rounds are two different things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_bleed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket-assisted_projectile

>>32188881
A Javelin CLU is like 125k and a single missile 78k. How can they not afford this, which will see much less combat use and much less training?

>>32189522

The whole point of the project was to shoot cheap cannon rounds at low-value targets you would have wasted a missile on.

But instead they're super expensive and don't do anything that a missile can't already. Buying expensive shit you don't need is dumb.

Imagine if someone offered you two guns - one is a $1,000 AR15, and the other is a $35,000 glock that fires special bullets that are currently out of stock. Which would you pick?

>>32187125
>>such a novelty item that will cost $800,000 per shot
That's what happens when you amortize the R&D over enough ammo for 32 ships and then Congress says NEVER MIND LOL and axes 29 of the ship orders.

>>32189560
AGS fires regular 155mm just fine. You're talking about the best conventional deck gun in the fleet, which can also fire said suped-up smart rounds.

The real story being told here is that Congress are retarded, and that NGFS is a tiny niche role that only became remotely relevant again because someone figured out a way to fit an extra 100 stand off munitions on a ship without ever touching the VLS cells.

>OP doesn't know what a gyrojet is

>>32187741
$800k is a clickbait article adding a one time purchase of ammunition handling equipment to the cost of 150 LRLAP rounds.

>>32189633
Then what's the accurate price-per-round?

Also, wasn't cancelling it Congress' idea?

>>32187125
I don't even think calling it canceled is accurate. This whole thing reeks of that game they play; 'we're going to shelve this to save money and pick it up again when we actually need it'.

>>32187714
China could afford ballistic anti-ship missiles and recon network of dozens satellites.

>>32189607
>AGS fires regular 155mm just fine.

That's the AR15 in my analogy.

Sorry that it isn't perfect.

>>32189650
It's $400,00 per round. Cancelling it was the Navy's idea, but only because Zumwalt was effectively cancelled by Congress. And now the Navy is about to start spending 80% of the cost of Zumwalt on upgraded Arleigh Burke destroyers that don't have the stealth or shore bombardment capability, because they still need new ships even if Zumwalt is cancelled.

>>32189794
I hope Trump and Mattis unfuck those decisions.

>>32189803
>hope
You still have any left? I ran out a long time ago.

>>32189803
>Marine general ramping up Navy budget
Do you even hear what you're saying?

>>32189809
Before Trump I just wanted the world to end because the apocalypse couldn't be much more soul crushing than what I saw coming. Now I think we're already beginning to reverse the decline of the request.

>>32189794
>Arleigh Burke destroyers that don't have...shore bombardment capability

Which ones are those?

>>32189815
Trump made a specific campaign promise about a 350 ship Navy. He's already starting to fulfill those promises starting with Carrier.

>>32189831
Because somehow $1.2 million Tomahawk missiles are the proper tool for coastal siege warfare.

>>32189863

What?

>>32189863
First off, don't say that fucking word, fixed fortifications are completely and utterly obsolete. Coastal missile complexes are almost invariably road mobile. Even the most hotly contested amphibious landing couldn't called a proper seige.

Second, Mk 45 Mod 4 reaches to 20 nmi. These are really solid guns that shouldn't be discounted. A LRLAP-like projectile is also feasable.

>>32189173
>Calls someone dumb

>Doesn't know he's talking about something completely different

>>32189794
>It's $400,00 per round

And of course you have the source for this price?

>>32189863
>Long range missiles are the correct tool for destroying radar and missile sites in naval warfare

Yeah, they are, imagine that

>>32189173
You really went all in, didnt you?

>>32189815
I don't understand this. Why wouldn't a Marine general want to better fund the Navy? Why make the MEU less capable?

>>32190044
The yearly military budget request which is public information.

>>32191124
But you cant link the source because?

>>32189815
isnt the marines under the department of the navy or some thing like that? so more naval budget = more marine budget since they get the scraps