FCS, P1 Vehicle Display on Washington DC Mall

Display of the Future Combat Systems(FCS) first prototype manned ground vehicle, Non-Line of Sight Cannon(NLOS-C)named P1 on the Washington DC Mall on 11 Jun 2008

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• future
• combat
• systems
• NLOC-C
• FCS

[StiviGun1]

@starknight97 he worked for the US military industry.

[StiviGun1]

@starknight97 There's no SM-6 missile is a totally different system than the Patriot... That's a naval system that's used by the US navy, not by the US army. The US army only uses the Patriot system, which has a max range of 160 km. It could've had much bigger range, but the idiot politicians didn't let it evolve like it should have evolved. But SM-6 has nothing to do with the Patriot system. To me, it looks like you're mistaking the PAC-3 with SM-3 which is very strange for someone who pretends

[starknight97]

@StiviGun1 look up the sm-6 missile it's the same used as the extended range version.

[StiviGun1]

@starknight97 The PAC-3 has a 20 km range, you idiot. It's a much smaller missile than the PAC-2 so it has a smaller engine so it can't have the range you're saying.... Are you really retarded?

Missile are always much cheaper than aircrfaft, you idiot. A missile may cost 2 million, while the F-35 costs 140 mil $. So how are arcraft cheaper, you moron? And not to mention that integrating aircraft with the Army would cost a lot. You're a dumbass.

[StiviGun1]

@starknight97 "Only 60 km"... You have no idea what a M270 platoon can do when its firing all its missiles carrying submunitions. I was calle steel rain during Desert Storm, there were cases where Iraqi soldiers were surrendering just knowing that they will be engaged with this wepon. You regular artillery cannon can never have such a firepower and intimidation capacity.

As for you, well, that's all you do, repeating youself. You saythe same bullsit over and over again.

[starknight97]

@StiviGun1 your fav you mlrs rocket is only 60km, forget et it you a retard i'm done with you i have too repeat myself over and over and over you a retard. your pointless to debate with and it goes nowhere with you tard.

[starknight97]

@StiviGun1 yes it part of the extended range which is pac-3 as the pac-2 has a 160km range. i would but you can't link here. if you asked about hitting Russian new rockets systems i'd told you about the new small missiles. What you talking about they seen you get 90% of you say wrong R tard. Missiles cost almost the same regardless the type yet a offensive would need speed and stealth now to be effective much more pricey and 10 time the price per shot. 

[StiviGun1]

@starknight97 Why exact;y are you so against America developing missile systems, that you would come up with the most ridiculous and laughable proposals as replacements, ha? Why are you so determined to convince people that much newer and much more capable missile system must be developed, ha? What's you game here?

[StiviGun1]

@starknight97 Any of those extremely large, bulky and heavy systems would be useless when much lighter and faster to deploy missiles can be built.Why the hell would you use such a large, heavy and bulky cannon, when there are much lighter and more mobile missile systems that can be developed? And it's funny how you argued that the Tomahawk's launcher was too "bulky" and now you come up with this idea for a REALLY large and bulky cannon, that can't even be transported by ship, let alone by air...

[StiviGun1]

@starknight97 What the hell is a "badger 288"...?