![germany03[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ArVI8Cm.jpg "germany03[1].jpg")
Will there be a cruise missile spam in a serious shooting war (no nukes) considering a single missile costs $2 mil a pop for just 300kg of explosives?
Yes, particularly in the Pacific.
The US is quite fond of using tomahawks and it's pretty much China's main strategy in the outbreak of a war.
>>30022399
Actually they're about $1 mil each.
Over 100 cruise missiles were fired at Libya in a single night
>>30022399
Yes
>>30022529
Then they ran out of missiles.
cruise missiles can be VERY cheap
nothing in them is intrinsically expensive
>>30022399
Typically, in an invasion, cruise missiles are well worth their cost. They can be fired far from enemy lines deep into enemy territory. Look at Iraq invasion. US used hundreds of cruise missiles in the opening hours to attack enemy C2. Once you get enough of it down, you can roll in some of your conventional fighters to attack more radars/enemy positions. Particularly airbases. It's very important to establish Air Supremacy ASAP.
>>30022399
>serious shooting war
>no nukes
No such thing
Cruise Missile Spam is major power's doctrine, except Russia, they're broke.
"Spam" is to my understanding, many missiles focused on a single target all at once.
To my knowledge this literally never happens.
>>30022399
>$2m a pop
What is amortization?
They cost that because they were made with 1980s technology in fixed production runs. Built with modern tech, in larger quantities, costs would be much cheaper - probably in the <400k range.
>>30022600
Sounds about right.
>>30023980
>What is amortization?
I can assure you amortization is not what you think it means.
>>30022529
>>30022547
From a single sub, mind you. OMFG class.
Missiles would be fired until somebody gets air superiority, at which point the other side would be smothered in JDAMs.
>>30022553
How cheap can they be? I've wondered this for a long time. Do you mean there are very cheap cruise missiles, or that say, a tomahawk, can be produced on the cheap?
>not just using scud tech
COMRADE
>>30028434
Well, depending on your budget, they can cost anywhere from $100 to $10000 to manufacture.
If you have an automobile and a garage, you can freely build one out of plywood to hold a relatively small warhead for practically free.
If you plan on making one about a meter in length to hold, say fifty kilograms of explosives, maybe you should consider expanding your operation and building/testing several prototypes before producing them en-masse.
Ideally, you should be using a valveless jet propulsion system like the germans had on their V1's. Infact, you should be copying the V1 design to begin with, since it's absolutely ideal for the cruise missiles people have in mind.
>>30022399
Fuck yeah.
>>30030277
I don't think any usable cruise missile would cost anywhere from $100 to 10000. That's like saying an aircraft is cheap since you can fold one out of a piece of paper.
>>30030277
ISIS plz, you're going to want some sort of guidance unless you're just trying to terrorize other kebabs. You could GPS it, but then it's only good against static positions.
>>30022399
Even if we roll with $2m a pop, and send 3 or 4 missiles at primary targets to ensure suitable destruction, it's still worth it. The targets are going to be focused on enemy air defense and general command and control facilities, even ignoring that you might well be ahead $ for $ simply in destroying some of those facilities the fact that you are enabling your airforce to begin operating in a considerably safer environment is absolutely worth it. And the equation goes even further in favour of missile spam if you're not burgerland so lack any kind of lolstealth air options, and instead rely on sending multirole fighters in to do your bombing from the start.
>>30022399
It all depends on to analyses:
A: cost/benefit
B: risk.
That is all.
Cost is in millions. Benefit is that you do not risk the lives of service men and you get quick results.
Risk therefore is negligible.
>>30028626
Shoo, shoo GLA scum.
>>30031481
>>30031536
Guidance systems really only cost a lot because the defense contractors charge outrageously for it
Nothing stopping them from using consumer grade electronics for a tenth of the price.
>>30031763
yeah good luck with that
