The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
Next we'll be hearing about shark missiles. Aircraft will fire a mako shark with a machinegun turret on its head at the target.
See I thought it was friggen not frikken, so I edited my post.
puma guy wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 8:36 pm But Wait!! For a limited time we'll double the offer, so you get two Ginsu Rockets for the single low price of one, just pay shipping and handling.
None of the good ones ever are...WildBill wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:52 pm Very interesting. I had no idea there was such a weapon. Definitely not cost effective.
It mentions that it is used when they worry about collateral damage. So they can precision drop this on the car and only damage the car (looking at some pictures, non-targets might live depending on vehicle and where you were sitting). So if you are willing to spend the money doing this with normal missiles, not like this thing is any more expensive than those. Cost can run from $25,000 to $117,000 per depending on the specific type of hellfire from my little bit of reading (seems typical use is $75,000 to $100,000 per unit). Couldn't find anything on the R9X price, but can't imagine since it doesn't pack explosives that it would be anymore expensive than a normal one (or at least significantly so).WildBill wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:52 pm Very interesting. I had no idea there was such a weapon. Definitely not cost effective.
It’s more cost effective than a Hellfire missile if you’re concerned about collateral fatalities/injuries. If $$/KIA is the only metric, then a $1.50 .308 bullet is cheaper yet when it comes to assassinations of foreign military leaders—even though it might be impossible to pull off without sacrificing the man who pulls the trigger. On the other hand, the Ginsu missile is probably a great choice for assassinating jihadis at those famous weddings where dozens of non-combatants get massacred by a 1000 pounder.WildBill wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:52 pm Very interesting. I had no idea there was such a weapon. Definitely not cost effective.
Birds of a feather, flock together. I feel like a bomb that kills everyone around the terrorist is beneficial. Kill them all and let god sort them out.The Annoyed Man wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 10:39 pmIt’s more cost effective than a Hellfire missile if you’re concerned about collateral fatalities/injuries. If $$/KIA is the only metric, then a $1.50 .308 bullet is cheaper yet when it comes to assassinations of foreign military leaders—even though it might be impossible to pull off without sacrificing the man who pulls the trigger. On the other hand, the Ginsu missile is probably a great choice for assassinating jihadis at those famous weddings where dozens of non-combatants get massacred by a 1000 pounder.WildBill wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:52 pm Very interesting. I had no idea there was such a weapon. Definitely not cost effective.
I was thinking more about the development cost and how you would justify funding to make a weapon that will be used only a handful of times.Jago668 wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 10:28 pmIt mentions that it is used when they worry about collateral damage. So they can precision drop this on the car and only damage the car (looking at some pictures, non-targets might live depending on vehicle and where you were sitting). So if you are willing to spend the money doing this with normal missiles, not like this thing is any more expensive than those. Cost can run from $25,000 to $117,000 per depending on the specific type of hellfire from my little bit of reading (seems typical use is $75,000 to $100,000 per unit). Couldn't find anything on the R9X price, but can't imagine since it doesn't pack explosives that it would be anymore expensive than a normal one (or at least significantly so).WildBill wrote: Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:52 pm Very interesting. I had no idea there was such a weapon. Definitely not cost effective.
I have no idea of the cost of a mission to send a team in to kill/capture the guy. I also have no idea of the cost to run the drone to deliver the missile. So which one of those two paths is more economical I don't know, but explosive or ginsu doesn't seem like it would make much difference.
Interesting note that evidently development started in 2011, and as far as we know first deployed in 2017. So evidently taping some home shopping network knives to it, and stuffing it full of rocks instead of explosives is fairly complicated.
Let me know how you feel about that after being sent in to do a post strike assessment..03Lightningrocks wrote: Thu Dec 05, 2019 1:20 am Birds of a feather, flock together. I feel like a bomb that kills everyone around the terrorist is beneficial. Kill them all and let god sort them out.