Huge conventional war, all modern assets BTFO, what can be mass produced?

Attached: MiG-21-800x450.jpg (800x450, 53K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_F-105_Thunderchief#Vietnam_War
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Depends entirely on how heavily damaged a country's industries are. It's also hard to say whether or not current systems could be mass produced if necessary. Since WWII, no major industrial power has been in a place where they were losing so much materiel that they needed to produce weapons at WWII levels. I'd imagine active production lines could be scaled up fairly quickly as necessary.

Is absolutely right. And this means to answer this question you have to look into a countrie's industrial capabilities first.
First and foremost:
We WONT see the return of older stuff just because it is simple. For example the US wouldn't start to produce F-4 Phantoms (OPs pic leads me into thinking thats what he means).
Most of the "old and simple" stuff cannot be produced anymore because the tooling is gone - period. That means you had to reverse engineer weaponry which was constructed by a whole different generation of engineers AND you had to rebuild the tooling.
Doesnt make much sense since it's an all out war and no matter what you need, you need it ASAP.

Here's the thing (and I know its kinda boring).
Most nations would crank out what they already use but in a more conventional style, cutting edges to rev up production times and eliminate the need for delicate, expensive, hard to acquire stuff.

Think about M1 tanks without a huge chunk of the modern sophisticated electronics. Thermal sight, yeah. Laser ranging, yeah, a simple fire control computer, yeah.
But I would think those tanks would be built with a much simpler armor. Perhaps with a diesel instead of the turbine (it would be logical considering fuel consumption and I know it has been done for prototypes but I'm not so sure wether this would fall under the "takes too long" rule for general production).

tl;dr: Most modern assets could be mass produced but in much simpler variants as we know them.

To be fair, both the US and Russia at least keep a fair amount of obsolete and outdated equipment in reserves or boneyards for use in extreme cases. Ironically, the F-4 is one of those.

Otherwise I agree with your point 100%.

Your mom

>Ironically, the F-4 is one of those.
No it isn't. Virtually all F-4s have ben converted to QF-4 target drones and shot down over the years. The US has no F-4s anymore that could be put back into service.
The only thing we are talking here are early Block F-16s

only guns and maybe some simple missiles, anything else takes too long and its too complicated, realistically any country would just surrender at this point, that saying it doesn't go nuclear by now

i can't wait for summer to end

Im thinking AFRICA as a case analysis. lots of stories there about cheap "solutions"
Aircraft- Cessna's for absolute minimum for scouting planes, other more combat oriented aircraft like trainers for POSSIBLE CAS with recoiless rifles, dumbbombs or an AK out the side. For Helis, simple rugged choppers with simple dumb bombs, and simple avionics. a turret gun if you are lucky. I'm thinking Hinds with zero ammunition like that one madman russian Merc. For tanks I think this user is right with the downgraded Abrams idea, or whatever style of tank is domestically produced. if Africa, maybe a super cheap Chinese ZTZ-type tank. maybe something russian. I guess with a question like this, its not so much what can be produced, but what can be produced with arguable effectiveness

Attached: 1406696574155.png (1200x950, 1.32M)

You could easily build entire jet fighters using carbon fiber without an autoclave. Consumer grade MCUs can already handle fly by wire with the computer stabilizing unstable designs. Engines are the biggest issue, in the short term taking engine cores out of airliners and turning them into low bypass afterburning engines would work. If they run out of cores they would probably have to resort to 3d printed turbine blades.
You can more or less see how it would go by looking at hobbyist built aircraft and RC models. Realistically if they had access to decent jet engines and no laws stopping them they would be building supersonic planes already.

The U.S. has 95% of the planets helium stored in old salt mines "just in case" dirigibles (blimps) become adventagous in a wartime scenerio.

F-4 were exported left and right, depending on what is left in the bone yards you will just have to deal with 100 airframes used as spare parts just to make maybe a bunch of airworthy machines, this if electronics equipment are still working and you don't have to deal with plumbing and internal fuel tanks.
Also most of the ground crew whom maintained them it's no longer qualified for it.
Will be F-4G still effective?
Could RF-4C be deployed with nukes without the special pylon and console code that were destroyed during the dismantling process?
F-4E didn't receive any kind of upgrade during the 80's, the last ones who went in for the Desert Storm were just Pave Spike compatible.
Basically F-4EJ Kai, Luftwaffe F-4F, JDF, Hellenic and Turkish airframes were more capable than US airframes

F4s are heavy , difficult to mantain, need advanced engines, and need well trained pilots (2!).
What can be mass-produced on some sort of advanced workshops instead of manufacturing lines? Well, that would be migs-17s/15s, axial jet engines are too complicated, and you need simpler aerodynamics, so there you go.

Artillery could very easily be mass produced - and the best thing is that it is cheap and effective where it matters.

APCs are very easy to build too, tanks and other armed vehicles are more expensive if they are complex.

Operating air and missile forces are probably the most expensive, followed by blue water navy. These are hard to replace.

Attached: fa54e8c1.jpg (1920x1311, 532K)

The US is capable of mass producing everything. Our only real issue would sourcing titanium. We have the manpower to sustain war for decades. We have the materials to sustain war for decades. We have the industry to sustain war for decades.

For aircraft we could easily restart F-15, F/A-18, F-16 production.
For tanks and AFVs we have thousands of M1 hulls in desert storage, and have the capability to restart their production along with bradleys and strykers.
For small arms EVERY machine shop can produce M16s, M240s, M249s.

The level of trained workers needed to work those production lines is no where near what it would need to be for a high attrittion conflict, even if the tooling can be brought out of stoorage and the production lines restored, the number of trained engineers would still be far below required levels.

Thats not even going into the mess that would be missile production, there would be a material led lull some months into a high attrition conflict, with cruise missiles and SAMs backtracking to tube artilliery shells some weeks in.

>sourcing Titanium
Australia produces nearly 20% of the world's titanium minerals and Canada produces 10% of them, so sourcing it probably wouldn't be that hard.

>QF-4 target drone
>Not converting them into supersonic, long range cruise missiles in case of war

I tend to agree with most people in this thread with some notable exceptions.

Mass production on the scale that it was done in WW2 is pretty much Infeasible with modern military technology. How far removed was a car factory from making tanks in 1940? Transmissions are transmissions and engines are engines. With the use of increasingly more exotic materials and electronics being used today more specialized and sophisticated facilities are needed for making military equipment. Hardcore industrial mobilization where every mom and pop store was pumping out gizmos is a relic from the past.

Attached: lolmig.jpg (3300x2550, 752K)

Are these numbers for real?

Yes

Attached: THE-COMBAT-STATISTICS-FOR-ALL-THE-AIRCRAFT-CURRENTLY-IN-USE-Air-to-air-kills-–-Air-to-air-losses-� (2473x4847, 1.89M)

the only thing i’m 100% sure of is that the f-15 was in defeated but yeah russian got btfo’d alot

Tomcat is the most aesthetic of the bunch

In that scenario I wouldn't be surprised to see a cast iron M-4 variant mass produced just to get a gun in everyones hands, kind of like the M3 submachine gun was

Technically Russia keeps a large part of their equipment listed as "operational" in far worse condition than the US boneyard, i don't even want to know what condition their emergency war reserves are in.

Boeing and Airbus deliever around two airliners each in a single day

That are production capacities in place which would easily pull out several fighers a day.

Correct. The primary issue is a willingness and need to pay for those production rates, not the infrastructure itself.

Real, although it is an issue of middle eastern conflicts messing with straight comparisons.

Well, other than Vietnam, there aren't exactly a lot of examples of jet combat outside of the Middle East.

Yep.A straight comparison is difficult, since there's not enough data to work with. And the Vietnamese figured out how to exploit the weaknesses of the US forces. You can never garuntee victory.

American aircraft slaughter slavshit. it's not so hard

Perhaps you should add the F-105 to the picture?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_F-105_Thunderchief#Vietnam_War
>In spite of a troubled early service life, the F-105 became the dominant attack aircraft early in the Vietnam War. The F-105 could carry more than twice the bomb load farther and faster than the F-100, which was used mostly in South Vietnam
Not really sure why a fighter bomber's A2A record would be relevant, but ok.

the aircraft that killed about a million gooks?

No

Might have been relevant if the comparison was about strike fighters vs SAM and AAA.
Losses to MiG's in Vietnam are highly overhyped, AAA and ground fire downed more than twice as many aircraft as MiGs and SAMs combined.

Either import weapons from the nuclear powers or hope that MAD has ruined your enemy as much as you are. There is no realistic scenario that is not dictated by nuclear weapons since 1944. 4th generation warfare was born out of a nuclear scenario and has been though on a cultural level on the internet and the legacy media, from the rainbow revolutions to social credit systens and the coming internet of things.

wars of mass production cannot happen today.

nuclear war will never happen, no one on earth is insane to the point of doing it, even if they do, the silo operators would not do it, at least the majority, 99% of people aren't incel Jow Forumsacks who want to end the world cause jamal is banging their girls with his BBC

And why the fuck not?

In fact, industry is even better at mass production.

But thing like the F-35 will basically be BTFO in 2-3 weeks of total warfare combat attrition, so I think countries will revert back to older and simpler designs.

Obsessed

the last part yeah, but the nuclear part is right

rent free