sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) (11/15/90)
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) How long does it take to produce the following items? How many production lines are available for "surge" capability? (Stop laughing so hard...) - Maverick missile - Hellfire missile - HARM anti-radiation missile - Tomahawk cruise missile (land-attack/conventional version) - General cluster munitions and iron bombs. I realize some items (HARM comes to mind) are run with two production lines with the winner of the contract getting 60%/loser getting 40%; others are done on a "winner take all" basis. In a conventional war with Iraq, we'll be going through a LOT of munitions very quickly; anyone heard if DoD is cranking production lines?
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (11/16/90)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) >How long does it take to produce the following items? How many production lines >are available for "surge" capability? (Stop laughing so hard...) (Laughter deleted.) The surge capacity of the production lines is miniscule in comparison to the sort of consumption rate that would be normal in any substantial war. These are very complex weapons by the standards of earlier wars, and ramping up production would take years. For all practical purposes, a modern military force fights a war with whatever (inadequate) reserves it had when the war started. -- "I don't *want* to be normal!" | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology "Not to worry." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) (11/17/90)
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) In article <1990Nov16.053847.23433@cbnews.att.com>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > > >From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >>From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) >>How long does it take to produce the following items? How many production lines >>are available for "surge" capability? (Stop laughing so hard...) > >(Laughter deleted.) The surge capacity of the production lines is miniscule >in comparison to the sort of consumption rate that would be normal in any >substantial war. These are very complex weapons by the standards of >earlier wars, and ramping up production would take years. For all practical >purposes, a modern military force fights a war with whatever (inadequate) >reserves it had when the war started. Let's take the HARM as an example: Company A) Produces 60%, while company B) produces 40% on a standard DoD bid. War is declared. Both companies are allowed to product at their maximium rates (whatever they are), and furthermore are allowed to waive certain testing specifications (Such as: Demonstrated shelf life, testing for extreme cold ;-). The chokepoint in most weapons would be, I think, the electronic components. Circuit boards aren't something you can just crank out overnight unless you have a highly automated factory (such as an Apple or NeXT) designed for volume production. You'd also run into problems trying to volume produce certain composite structures which need to be baked in expensive ovens.
budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) (11/19/90)
From: budden@trout.nosc.mil (Rex A. Buddenberg) Can't speak to the weapons that Doug asked about, but... I do know several Loran and GPS receiver vendors that are cranking out receivers as fast as they can. And the Loran receivers all have the Saudi chain data in their coordinate converters. Coupled with this, DoD quietly turned off selective availability in August throughout the GPS system. As the rephasing proceeds and the launch schedule goes (no recent hitches), two dimensional coverage, 24 hours, is not far away. Guess the point is that commercial technology is filling a decidedly military need and there are multiple production lines to fill the surge requirements. Out year question. DoD's funding for high rate production of p-code GPS receivers (the ones that can accomodate selective availability) just got deferred....for the fourth time. At the same time that the operational forces are getting large quantities of commercial GPS receivers. Will DoD ever get selective availability turned back on? Rex Buddenberg
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (11/19/90)
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) >The chokepoint in most weapons would be, I think, the electronic components. >Circuit boards aren't something you can just crank out overnight unless you >have a highly automated factory ... The circuit boards themselves might not be that big a deal, if they were sufficiently behind the bleeding edge of technology to be in commercial use too. There are lots of PC-board shops. I think the real problem would be the parts. The prime contractor's assembly lines could probably be speeded up without *too* much trouble, given that the US military buys most of its weapons at production rates that are on the edge of being too low to be practical. The problem would be keeping those assembly lines supplied with parts. Many of the components used in high-tech weapons are specialized devices with no civilian market, built in tiny quantities by rather specialized production facilities. -- "I don't *want* to be normal!" | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology "Not to worry." | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry