this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2023

7 points (100.0% liked)

Credible Defense

441 readers

11 users here now

An unofficial counterpart to the subreddit r/CredibleDefense, intended to be a supplementary resource and potential fallback point. If you are an active moderator over there, please don't hesitate to contact me to be given a moderation position.

Wiki Glossary of Common Terms and Abbreviations. (Request an addition)

General Rules

Strive to be informative, professional, gracious, and encouraging in your communications with other members here. Imagine writing to a superior in the Armed Forces, or a colleague in a think tank or major investigative journal.

This is not at all intended to be US-centric; posts relating to other countries are highly encouraged.

No blind partisanship. We aim to study defense, not wage wars behind keyboards. Defense views from or about all countries are welcome so long as they are credible.

If you have experience in relevant fields, understand your limitations. Just because you work in the defense arena does not mean you are always correct.

Please refrain from linking the sub outside of here and a small number of other subs (LCD, NCD, War College, IR_Studies, NCDiplomacy, AskHistorians). This helps control site growth (especially limiting surges) and filters people toward those with a stronger interest.

No denial of war crimes or genocide.

Comments

Should be substantive and contribute to discussion.

No image macros, GIFs, emojis or memes.

No AI-generated content.

Don’t be abrasive/insulting.

No one-liners, jokes, insults, shorthand, etc. Avoid excessive sarcasm or snark.

Sources are highly encouraged, but please do not link to low-quality sources such as RT, New York Post, The National Interest, CGTN, etc. unless they serve a useful purpose.

Be polite and informative to others here, and remember that we should be able to disagree without being disagreeable.

Do not accuse or personally challenge others, rather ask them for sources and why they have their opinions.

Do not ask others about their background as it is rude and not encouraging of others to have an open discussion.

Please do no not make irrelevant jokes, offtopic pun threads, use sarcasm, respond to a title of a piece without reading it, or in general make comments that add nothing to the discussion. Please refrain from top-level jokes. Humor is appreciated, but it should be infrequent and safe for a professional environment.

Please do not blindly advocate for a side in a conflict or a country in general. Surely there are many patriots here, but this is not the arena to fight those battles.

Asking questions in the comment section of a submission, or in a megathread, is a great way to start a conversation and learn.

Submissions

Posts should include a substantial text component. This does not mean links are banned, instead, they should be submitted as part of the text post. Posts should not be quick updates or short-term. They should hold up and be readable over time, so you will be glad that you read them months or years from now.

Links should go to credible, high-quality sources (academia, government, think tanks), and the body should be a brief summary plus some comments on what makes it good or insightful.

Essays/Effortposts are encouraged. Essays/Effortposts are text posts you make that have an underlying thesis or attempt to synthesize information. They should cite sources, be well-written, and be relatively long. An example of an excellent effort post is this.

Please use the original title of the work (or a descriptive title; de-editorializing/de-clickbaiting is acceptable), and possibly a sub-headline.

Refrain from submissions that are quick updates in title form, troop movements, ship deployments, terrorist attacks, announcements, or the crisis du jour.

Discussions of opinion pieces by distinguished authors, historical research, and research on warfare relating to national security issues are encouraged.

We are primarily a reading forum, so please no image macros, gifs, emojis, or memes.

~~Moderators will manually approve all posts.~~ Posting is unrestricted for the moment, but posts without a submission statement or that do not meet the standards above will be removed.

No Leaked Material

Please do not submit or otherwise link to classified material. And please take discussions of classified material to a more secure location.

In general, avoid any information that will endanger anyone.

#Please report items that violate these rules. We don’t know about it unless you point it out.

We maintain lists of sources so that anyone can help to find interesting open-source material to share. As outlets wax and wane in quality, please help us keep the list updated:

https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/credibleoutlets

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

qwamqwamqwam

U.S. Ramps Up Howitzer Shell Production to Supply Ukraine, Replenish Stockpiles (archive.is)

submitted 2 years ago by qwamqwamqwam to c/credibledefense

1 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Submission Statement The outcomes of wars are determined in part by the capacity of factions to maintain and replace capabilities as they degrade. While Western stockpiles are large, they are not infinite, and excessive depletion could endanger other allies. Both the existing progress and political commitments reported in this article are positive signs for the sustainment, and therefore future success, of the Ukrainian war effort.

The U.S. has sharply increased production of a key artillery shell, helping to alleviate a global shortage of the ammunition that threatened to squeeze Ukrainian forces as they battle Russia, the U.S. Army’s acquisition chief said.

Doug Bush, the Army’s assistant secretary for acquisitions, logistics and technology, said in an interview that the U.S. is currently producing around 24,000 155-millimeter howitzer shells each month, up from around 14,000 a month before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The U.S. wants to hit monthly output of between 70,000 and 80,000 shells a month by early in the 2025 fiscal year, he said.

“We are on a very rapid path to get to really high numbers,” Bush said. The U.S. has drawn down some of its own stockpiles of the ammunition to supply Ukraine. Bush said those stockpiles are more robust than many people believe, and that they will return to prewar levels quickly.

top 1 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] qwamqwamqwam 1 points 2 years ago

A more immediate concern is the West’s push to boost shipments of artillery to Ukraine, which is burning through supplies faster than they can be replenished.

For instance, despite winning U.S. government contracts to produce at full throttle, defense giant Lockheed Martin still expects it will take another 18 to 24 months before all of its munition-production lines are operating at maximum capacity, said Frank St. John, the company’s chief operating officer.

During news conferences at the air show this week, Republican and Democratic U.S. lawmakers who were part of a delegation said they expected Congress to increase U.S. funding for arms for the fight against Russia. “What the West does in Ukraine is one of the greatest determining factors in how the rest of the world responds to the challenges of China,” said Sen. Jerry Moran (R., Kan.).

Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) said U.S. lawmakers were proud that U.S. allies joined the country’s support for Ukraine. “We’re in it for the long haul,” he said. “We’re in it for them to win it, and we’re going to support them, whatever it takes.”