Stepping backward.. Lower tech.

[ArmySGT.]

I'm guesssing that retooling will take too long. However lots of old weapons will be in storage and reissued, even back to WW2 era small arms in the US - the stockpiles were discussed in another thread.

It might be just the U.S. that scraps it all. ......... Does anyone know if other countries (besides Russia) preserve and store the tooling for systems taken out of service

The possibility that many systems have had their paper schematics converted into CAD drawings for production on CNC systems....... this is certainly true for the M1911A1 and AR-15. Most of the Remington 700 is investment cast or CNC machined as appropriate. One rifle maker (HS Precision) CNC Winchester Model 70 components.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I agree in that it would work in only the most basic way....... Something is down there... Something large is down there. I just question the utility of something like this due to the limited range and narrow projection.

It might be my understanding is wrong, but any sonar from the 70's should give depth, speed, and an indication of mass (displacement). A system from the 90s can distinguish a whale from a school or fish, from a attack submarine.... comparing recorded acoustic profiles.

1980s tech fishfinders were sophisticated enough to distinguish between objects on the bottom, schools of small fish and single large fishes etc. etc. Plus they had shallow and deep water models and models that included both operating modes. 1990s tech fishfinders increased the sensitivity again and typically increased the functionality of the unit, e.g. various recording modes, projected direction of the fish (or object), adding waypoints, determining if bottom is hard or soft (e.g. rock or sand) and so on.

You also had units that were not permanently mounted on the vessel and thus could be transferred to larger or smaller vessel as needed.
Just like with any naval sonar unit, direction and projection of the scanning device can be increased by using more transducers mounted in different places on the vessel's hull (although we're talking now about a PC or NPC with at least Electronics skill to be able to set up an effective unit with multiple transducers).

While they obviously didn't have a range in the thousands of metres, they did have ranges from tens of metres up to around one hundred metres and commercial fishing models had ranges in the hundreds of metres. They are a sonar device, just not as sensitive as a naval unit as they don't have the power output and range of frequency bands available to a naval unit.
while they won't have the acoustic sophistication to distinguish between, for example, different propeller types, they would still be suitable for scanning rivers, harbours and coastlines to determine if an object is a group of fish, a rock outcrop, an object sitting on the bottom (e.g. car wreck, 44gal drums, shipwreck), a scuba diver, a whale or a submersible vehicle.

The only real limitation is the operator. They have to learn what the different indicators mean because companies creating commercial & recreational units never stuck to one standard display output like you would see on a naval sonar unit.

[swaghauler]

I agree in that it would work in only the most basic way....... Something is down there... Something large is down there. I just question the utility of something like this due to the limited range and narrow projection.

It might be my understanding is wrong, but any sonar from the 70's should give depth, speed, and an indication of mass (displacement). A system from the 90s can distinguish a whale from a school or fish, from a attack submarine.... comparing recorded acoustic profiles.

Even 1990's recreational/noncommercial DEPTH FINDERS (the universal recreational name for fish finders) were FAR SUPERIOR to 1950's MILITARY SONAR. The only difference between commercial and recreational depth finders is the software in them (from the mid 90's on anyway).

My Depth Finder is tied directly into my Chart Plotter and projects a picture of the bottom right onto my map overlay. It can also show a small "box" on the side of my plotter's display that will allow you to see sonar images from the side so that you can gauge depth off of the bottom. It has a "shoal warning" alarm that will detect a rapid shallowing of the bottom and a "fish alarm" (all depth finders can tell the difference between bottom and fish since the 90's) that detects movement under the boat.

Most subs have been designed to defeat Commercial SONAR and Depth Finders. Detecting a normal sub (WW2 to late 60's) would be ONE LEVEL MORE DIFFICULT and detecting a modern (post 60's) sub would be at least TO LEVELS MORE DIFFICULT.

For more information on Depth Finders just Google them or go to West Marine's website and check out the FAQ's.

[ArmySGT.]

Even 1990's recreational/noncommercial DEPTH FINDERS (the universal recreational name for fish finders) were FAR SUPERIOR to 1950's MILITARY SONAR. The only difference between commercial and recreational depth finders is the software in them (from the mid 90's on anyway).

Which I assumed right away........ I don't think it is until the 1970's (my example) that integrated a computer to run filters and make full use of a hydrophones sensitivity. The 40's and 50's are vaccuum tube systems with transistors only making units smaller, but not more efficient to the best of my limited knowledge.

Are the displays on these commercial systems even large enough to do Anti submarine or counter sabotage (anti-diver) operations without a penalty for the operator Do they have variable modes and systems to screen out some or most noise

[ArmySGT.]

Any thoughts on older designs like recoiless rifles making a comeback with anti tank missiles all but impossible to reproduce

Am I the only one that thinks that the overall lack of anti tank weapons in T2k really only applies to missiles Shells for recoilless rifles, anti tank guns, and even anti tank rockets like the AT4, LAW, and RPG-7 are not much more sophisticated to make than the fused mortar and artillery shells being produced post-2000.

Passive IR systems only need transistors..... Is it only the transducer or light gathering plate that is stop small batch production

[CDAT]

Any thoughts on older designs like recoiless rifles making a comeback with anti tank missiles all but impossible to reproduce

Am I the only one that thinks that the overall lack of anti tank weapons in T2k really only applies to missiles Shells for recoilless rifles, anti tank guns, and even anti tank rockets like the AT4, LAW, and RPG-7 are not much more sophisticated to make than the fused mortar and artillery shells being produced post-2000.

Passive IR systems only need transistors..... Is it only the transducer or light gathering plate that is stop small batch production

Any US weapon at least post Vietnam would not be easy to make in the home shop (we put way to many safeties and junk in the device) The RPG and Recoilles rifle rounds more likely HE would be much easier to make than the HEAT rounds

[Jason Weiser]

A small item: In the early 2000s, one saw at many gunshows and other such places rows upon rows of Mosin-Nagant rifles (mostly dating from the 20s and 30s) in cardboard boxes, they were wrapped in oilskin paper, and the bayonet as well as a glass bottle of oil was often enclosed. The rifles were not given any cosmoline..and were, sans a visit to the gunsmith..ready to go out of the box.

According to the fella I talked to selling them He told me that this was the Russians clearing out all the old Soviet reserve armories. He also had captured German Mausers from the same source, in the same condition, with a Soviet headstamp overstamping the German one. In short, this might be the armament of your poor 1998 or 1999 draftee...a 50 year old rifle, with limited ammunition..that he barely knows how to use..or care for.

[WallShadow]

A small item: In the early 2000s, one saw at many gunshows and other such places rows upon rows of Mosin-Nagant rifles (mostly dating from the 20s and 30s) in cardboard boxes, they were wrapped in oilskin paper, and the bayonet as well as a glass bottle of oil was often enclosed. The rifles were not given any cosmoline..and were, sans a visit to the gunsmith..ready to go out of the box.

According to the fella I talked to selling them He told me that this was the Russians clearing out all the old Soviet reserve armories. He also had captured German Mausers from the same source, in the same condition, with a Soviet headstamp overstamping the German one. In short, this might be the armament of your poor 1998 or 1999 draftee...a 50 year old rifle, with limited ammunition..that he barely knows how to use..or care for.

I picked up a M1938 Mosin-Nagant carbine, which had some cosmoline in the inner workings. I also picked up several boxes of 7.62x54r rounds. Checking the web, the ammo is still available in "spam-cans" of 440 rounds. One thing about a Mosin-Nagant--it makes a great club that doesn't suffer much from use. I saw a video of a firearms/reloader enthusiast that tried to push the envelope of abuse the weapon could take. After dragging it around a field by a rope behind his truck, he sand-bagged it and remote-fired a series of rounds with increasing powder charges. from standard, to max advisable, to literally filling the entire case with propellant leaving just enough room to seat the bullet. Even this last hot load didn't blow out the breech, but the bolt required the application of a mallet to get it to open.

One TOUGH weapon.

[rcaf_777]

Any thoughts on older designs like recoilless rifles making a comeback with anti tank missiles all but impossible to reproduce Shells for recoilless rifles, anti tank guns, and even anti tank rockets like the AT4, LAW, and RPG-7 are not much more sophisticated to make than the fused mortar and artillery shells being produced post-2000.

I don't see them making a comeback as many weapons systems never left

As of 2001 the M67 Recoilless Rifle is still in production in South Korea ( Worldwide Equipment Guide 2001) Many more are still in service with avalanche control units of the National Park Service or Private Avalanche Control Companies. Apparently the ammunition stock pile was quite large as they are only now starting to run out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/us/20alta.html_r=0

http://archive.sltrib.com/story.phpref=/sltrib/news/51744312-78/avalanche-avalanches-canyon-closed.html.csp

The US must also have a fair number still held in reserve as they were issued to troops in Afghanistan in 2011

http://www.clarksvilleonline.com/2011/02/12/currahees-add-to-their-weapons-arsenal/

Although the M72 is no longer use in general service by the US Military, Many NATO, and US Allies still use it. American production of the M-72 began by Hesse-Eastern in 1963, and was terminated by 1983; currently it is produced by Nammo Raufoss AS in Norway and their subsidiary Nammo Talley, Inc. in Arizona.

http://www.talleyds.com/Talley%20Nammo%20Test%20page/products/m72_products.htm

AT-4 is still being produced in Sweden by Saab Bofors Dynamics and in US by Alliant Techsystems Inc who operates the Lake City Army Ammunition Plant having taken it over from the Olin Corporation in 2001. Im thinking many more companies would begin making it as US and World Wide demand goes up.

As stated in my pervious post the 105 mm M2A1 (M101A1) Howitzer is still used by Canada and by over 50 other nations. This is WWII tech and it still going strong.

Your retooling is interesting but I remember this TV show on discovery called Sons of Guns. During one of episodes they work on a Soviet 152mm Towed Howitzer M1955 (D-20) I think might have I D1. Anyway they made shells at their shop while they did not go into great detail, it dose beg the question, could this be done on a small scale locally.

[bobcat]

It might be just the U.S. that scraps it all. ......... Does anyone know if other countries (besides Russia) preserve and store the tooling for systems taken out of service

even we scrap surprisingly little. we store everything, there are depots filled with acres of deadlined humvees and other vehicles that although they are too damaged to be put back into service might have a part that can be recovered and used. several of these stockpiles go back at least as far as vietnam era equipment. the stuff that does get sraped is generaly beyond any viable use.

[ArmySGT.]

even we scrap surprisingly little. we store everything, there are depots filled with acres of deadlined humvees and other vehicles that although they are too damaged to be put back into service might have a part that can be recovered and used. several of these stockpiles go back at least as far as vietnam era equipment. the stuff that does get sraped is generaly beyond any viable use.

Sorry, I was speaking strictly of the tools and dies for making new. As far as I know... Most are destroyed, sold as scrap, or sold to someone else still using the system... the M14 is an example...... the tools and dies for those were sold to Taiwan when the M16 became the U.S. service rifle. Thousands of M14s were in stock..... (were the Clinton administration destroyed many) for decades with some few in service with the Navy, SOCOM, and some units in Alaska (bear protection along with M1s).

[ArmySGT.]

Quite a few factories seem to be intact - Lima is known to exist for example

I was also possibly thinking earlier in the war - WW2 shows examples where an inferior design was left in service and production as it was immediately available

Navy destroyers and Army tanks would be good examples.

I would say a large number of factories are intact in the U.S. and Canada. Most are outside of the commercial centers of major cities. They lack power and raw materials..... the manpower shortage, more importantly trained manpower (machinists, welders, fitters) have either been drafted or are dead from famine or disease. Concentrating the survivors with that skill set in one region to maximize their potential has to be a government goal.

Fix those three..... electrical power, raw material, and manpower and you can have some working plants again.... Some plants can't operate because they rely on components built at another plant hundreds or thousands of miles away.

[Olefin]

I have the BAE York plant operating again after it has power restored from Harrisburg in 2001 working on completing M88's, Bradley's, M109's and Bufords until they run out of parts. And while today you have a just in time environment and low stockpiles back then we used to have a lot of material in stock (let alone made our own harnesses and other items). Even when I was there back in 2008-2014 we used to have enough on hand at any one time to keep production going for a couple of months at a time - back in the mid-90's it was more like four to five months.

and the welders and other techs there all lived nearby - you had a lot of people there with 20-30 years experience - and York was untouched by the nuclear attacks in 1997 - so it may be the one plant that could be put back into at least low rate production pretty easily - and if you want a low tech vehicle then you would love the M88A1 or A2 - and EMP attack wouldnt faze it - about the only thing that wouldnt work on it would be the radio

[LT. Ox]

I wonder

Navy destroyers and Army tanks would be good examples.

I would say a large number of factories are intact in the U.S. and Canada. Most are outside of the commercial centers of major cities. They lack power and raw materials..... the manpower shortage, more importantly trained manpower (machinists, welders, fitters) have either been drafted or are dead from famine or disease. Concentrating the survivors with that skill set in one region to maximize their potential has to be a government goal.

Fix those three..... electrical power, raw material, and manpower and you can have some working plants again.... Some plants can't operate because they rely on components built at another plant hundreds or thousands of miles away.

Just a nit pic.
What age group do you think the Machinists would be in In my experience the largest number of Journeymen are in the 35 plus group with a substantial number in the 50 + not as likely to be drafted or gathered up. Also In all prior draft situations they and welders fitters etc have been exempt.
I do agree that a lot more quality manufacturing could be done then is assumed here.
Happy valley here in Colorado in 1990 until 2000 was putting out a lot of aerospace material contracted to larger Saint Louis and Kansas City Parent Companies.
laugh sayen.

[ArmySGT.]

Just a nit pic.
What age group do you think the Machinists would be in In my experience the largest number of Journeymen are in the 35 plus group with a substantial number in the 50 + not as likely to be drafted or gathered up. Also In all prior draft situations they and welders fitters etc have been exempt.
I do agree that a lot more quality manufacturing could be done then is assumed here.
Happy valley here in Colorado in 1990 until 2000 was putting out a lot of aerospace material contracted to larger Saint Louis and Kansas City Parent Companies.
laugh sayen.

I would think that they would be drafted into Service to fill vital Trades skills for the Navy and the Air Force....

For Iraqi Freedom the upper limit for enlistment was raised to 42 years..... In T2K the U.S. has Corps elements fighting on everywhere, but South America and Antarctica. (not sure about S.A.)

Then I see a shortage of under 25 coming up to replace them due to famine, plagues, and no formal training programs without power and tools.