SCALP / Storm Shadow / MdCN

Hopefully Ukraine can strike those warehouses and ammunition bunkers in Russia where the missiles and drones used in Russia's air-raids are being stored (Being able to hit the drone and missile factories would be good too).
 
I agree those [retooling] costs are there but you amortize those costs over higher production runs with lower unit costs. As we move further into 3d printing then the complexity of the production line decreases and its ability to adapt to different designs improves. Raytheon is already doing this with many parts and whree Andruil is going with their Arsenal facilities points to where wider Industry, including European manufactures and Govts should be looking.
If we assume that munitions are broadly comparable to a high end performance car, I will note that Porsche, Ferrari, and Lamborghini still keep an assembly line running at relatively low but constant rates instead of a production surge, retool, make something else, retool, make another run of the first item, retool etc.

Also, keeping an assembly line warm by a low constant production means that in the event of a war or military intervention that suddenly spikes demand for the weapons, you can expand the line much more easily than you can tool up from scratch.
 
That's talking about new forms of component and tool production, not a new form of production line.
It was an example I found from a two second Google search. You could also read about Tesla and their supply chain and production changes impacting the industry although what Andruil is doing is far more relevant and in the same sector.

For example
We are bringing under one roof the capability to build everything Anduril currently produces across every conceivable variety of autonomous vehicle and weapon, and doing that at hyperscale.

Seeking your agreement isn't the intent here, presenting an alternative for the future of weapons production is.
 
If we assume that munitions are broadly comparable to a high end performance car, I will note that Porsche, Ferrari, and Lamborghini still keep an assembly line running at relatively low but constant rates instead of a production surge, retool, make something else, retool, make another run of the first item, retool etc.

Also, keeping an assembly line warm by a low constant production means that in the event of a war or military intervention that suddenly spikes demand for the weapons, you can expand the line much more easily than you can tool up from scratch.
As we've seen with Ukraine support scaling production quickly even with a warm production line just isn't realistic. It has taken and will continue to take literally years for some systems and weapons to increase in rate. Most of that is due to supplier limitations but that is where shorter higher volume production runs make far more sense.
 
As we've seen with Ukraine support scaling production quickly even with a warm production line just isn't realistic. It has taken and will continue to take literally years for some systems and weapons to increase in rate. Most of that is due to supplier limitations but that is where shorter higher volume production runs make far more sense.
I suspect that is mostly due to suppliers buying things like computer chips off the shelf instead of having a chip fab they own for military projects.

Most chip fabs have at least a 6 month lead before they could possibly make your run of chips. Some are at 18-24 months lead time.
 
I suspect that is mostly due to suppliers buying things like computer chips off the shelf instead of having a chip fab they own for military projects.

Most chip fabs have at least a 6 month lead before they could possibly make your run of chips. Some are at 18-24 months lead time.
Not really much to do with chips and a lot more to do with the whole supply chain being geared to just in time and low volume production. Post covid there remains workforce challenges as well. Worth reading this to understand the issue,

 
what Andruil is doing is far more relevant and in the same sector.

Vertical integration (what Anduril is doing) has advantages, but also has disadvantages. We can see this with the Boeing purchase of Spirit, bringing fuselage manufacture back in house. The advantage is they don't have to pay sub-contractor profits, the disadvantage is they have to fund the entire line, deal with all of Spirit's subcontractors as well as their own, and absorb all the risk. (Investors would also consider it a disadvantage as number of employees goes up, diluting earnings per employee, but that's not a metric I value highly)

A particular disadvantage in the defence sphere is it makes it very difficult to compete in projects requiring either complete or partial local production, something that's often legally mandated or implicitly understood- try selling into the US market without a US partner....

Seeking your agreement isn't the intent here, presenting an alternative for the future of weapons production is.

It's a forum, multiple opinions exist. But when those alternate opinions present inconvenient real world facts it's probably worth considering how they impact your point.
 
Vertical integration (what Anduril is doing) has advantages, but also has disadvantages. We can see this with the Boeing purchase of Spirit, bringing fuselage manufacture back in house. The advantage is they don't have to pay sub-contractor profits, the disadvantage is they have to fund the entire line, deal with all of Spirit's subcontractors as well as their own, and absorb all the risk. (Investors would also consider it a disadvantage as number of employees goes up, diluting earnings per employee, but that's not a metric I value highly)
You're missing the point but it isn't worth it going further.
A particular disadvantage in the defence sphere is it makes it very difficult to compete in projects requiring either complete or partial local production, something that's often legally mandated or implicitly understood- try selling into the US market without a US partner....
This is outside of what I am discussing and suggesting.

It's a forum, multiple opinions exist. But when those alternate opinions present inconvenient real world facts it's probably worth considering how they impact your point.
Not quite, facts are present, it doesn't match your opinion but as I said that isn't my intent here.
 
Yes, and JIT exists because it is cheaper to operate that way.
Sure it is cheaper for some items although that isn't across the board. The whole point though is JIT doesn't improve defence capability nor weapon stocks.

With the end of the Cold War, the Pentagon moved away from maintaining costly stockpiles and embraced the just-in-time supply model of the corporate world to help generate a peace dividend.

But DoD Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Bill LaPlante says the Ukraine conflict and other factors have highlighted the weakness of some of that thinking, which can hobble efforts to boost production. As Pentagon acquisition chief, LaPlante has called shifting away from a just-in-time approach ‘something that is essential to the future fight’.

Similarly, US Air Force Lieutenant General Michael J. Schmidt, who runs the Joint Program Office for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, said, ‘When you take a just-in-time mentality, which I think is kind of a business model in the commercial industry that works very well in terms of keeping cost down and those kinds of things, it introduces a lot of risk operationally.’
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom