Hacker News Reader

Comment by krige | Hacker News Reader

Wrong on the first count (last I saw they were well below $200k a pop), and the second count comes with significant loss of anti-armor capability.

View on HN

I'd be curious to learn what advanced self-guided missile can accurately strike targets just a measly 70km away for $200k, and what the supporting infrastructure and hardware costs to buy and run.

Also you're still not remotely competetive with drones that can be carried and operated by infantry at that price point. Who's going to do reconaissance so you even know where to strike before you fire that missile? A drone provides all of that in a package that'd still be less than 1/10th the cost.

Okay, now it's obvious you're just posting whatever to "win" a discussion without any familiarity with the subject. I suggest you start educating yourself by familiarising yourself with the Brimstone missiles, 1996 tech in service for over 20 years at this point.

Brimstone meets none of the criteria, not for self-guidance, nor for range (especially not when launched surface-to-surface). Plus you'd have to bring a launch platform within range of Russian air-defense/frontlines to even use it.

First - the munition you quoted does none of the things you indicated it might do a few posts ago, and second - your gasligting people for being 'uninformed' when you've literally just proven yourself wrong with you own quote?

there are quite some american defense strategists, that criticize the dependency on large contractors that have no interest in providing economical capabilities over large government contracts.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com