this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
201 points (98.1% liked)
Ukraine
8285 readers
536 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam
- No content against Finnish law
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with these long range Standoff munitions is that they're sorely needed in the indo-pacific region if there's ever a war with China. (Likely to be within the next few years) It's going to give some pause to US planners as range is at a premium there. I don't see JASSM going to Ukraine myself, as these missiles are reserved for a fight with China. However, it may be a useful move to get Europe to chip in for long range munitions.
Getting to do some real world test in russia before actually needing them in china is probably not a bad idea.
Even if Ukraine only received and used a pair of these missiles, Russia would have to react to the possibility that Ukraine received many many more. This could be a positive development for UA ground forces just like we're seeing TU-92 and TU-22 being operated at more distant airbases and Sevestapol being emptied in favor of Novorossiysk.
I haven't read any expert discussion, but I am wondering if that will be such a problem. That was an issue for ATACMS, but:
PrSM, which I understand to be the ATACMS replacement, was subsequently accepted by the Army.
https://www.twz.com/one-argument-against-giving-atacms-to-ukraine-is-about-to-erode
It sounds like we've also ramped up ATACMS production since then.
https://breakingdefense.com/2024/04/sullivan-says-ukraine-supplemental-should-cover-all-of-2024-long-range-atacms-now-in-ukraine/
In the case of JASSM, it's not ramping up production of a weapon with a large stockpile relative to production rate and limited production that's on the edge of being phased out, but a new weapon (well, in the case of the -ER variant); I'd guess that it's probably less painful to increase the rate of production if we need more for China.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/2024/ramping-up--lockheed-martin-steadily-increasing-production-o.html
https://www.twz.com/air/jassm-stealth-cruise-missiles-now-on-the-table-for-ukraine-report
I mean, the "Arsenal of Democracy" rhetoric reminiscent of World War II is, I think, a bit overheated -- as I've pointed out before, if the US allocated a comparable level of GDP to military production to what it did in World War II, it could support hundreds of concurrent conflicts at the scale it is of the Russo-Ukrainian War. 2024 isn't 1944. But capacity has indeed been coming online; it's not static.
Maybe capacity is to the point where military planners are willing to give up stock of some missiles. But if I've taken anything away from the Russo-Ukranian war, it's that quantity of weapons systems is incredibly important. There's a heck of a lot of targets to hit in China.
However if the US is in a position to send JASSM to Ukraine, I will be excited. Personally, I'm very excited to see what weapons systems that Ukraine can now use since it has F-16. Especially with JDAM-ER which the Russians have shown the effectiveness of.
The resurgence of the ATACMs is aimed at Ukraine and Europe as a whole. Especially Poland and its massive HIMARS fleet on order. It would definitely be useful in the Pacific, but from what I see in the procurement requests, it's mostly for foreign order. It's a major move though, seeing as new production of the ATACMs was terminated in 2007.