News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The program to build NASA’s moon rocket could double in p... by dragonwriter on Thursday October 11, 2018 @12:13PM (#18194729)
> Why wouldn't you want an Abrams? It does all the things

Because you haven't fought the kind of war that heavy armor is useful (particularly on an effectiveness to logistical burden analysis) for in decades, and don't expect to in the foreseeable future.

Re:The program to build NASA’s moon rocket could double in p... by madeuptempacct on Thursday October 11, 2018 @01:07PM (#18195184)
Abrams lit up Iraqi T-72s recently. Absolute air superiority isn't a thing in a real war, even for the US. ATGMs will lose their deterrence factor if APS systems end up working as advertised, so tanks will regain their relevance.

Also, tanks support infantry in cities. When properly utilized, they don't end up on fire like T-80s in Grozny. Again, during the Iraq war, marines were supported by tanks in cities.

Re:The program to build NASA’s moon rocket could double in p... by pc86 on Thursday October 11, 2018 @02:50PM (#18196057)
None of which means squat when you consider that you could wipe out half of all the US Abrams in the world and we'd still have too many to use for any foreseeable conflict. You're arguing that the Abrams is a good platform when nobody is saying the opposite. It's a great platform.

But we have plenty of them, and we don't need to build anymore.

Respond to the point people are making and not the point you have a response for.

Re:The program to build NASA’s moon rocket could double in p... by paulie_a on Thursday October 11, 2018 @02:55PM (#18196095)
Or we just stop starting wars. Then we can just reduce the redicilous funding of both air and land vehicles.