Libertarian Institute: Rising Ammunition Prices Could Interfere with Western Plans to Arm Ukraine
A top NATO official warned that rising ammunition prices could mean that Western countries do not spend enough on the military to sufficiently arm Ukraine. Washington and its allies have pledged nearly $100 billion in weapons to Kiev since the Russian invasion last year.
On Saturday, the chair of NATO’s military committee, Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer said alliance members need to spend more on defense to account for the rising prices. “Prices for equipment and ammunition are shooting up. Right now, we are paying more and more for exactly the same,” he said. “That means that we cannot make sure that the increased defense spending actually leads to more security.”
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The New York Times reported on the increasing cost of Western ammunition last week .... Russia Overcomes Sanctions to Expand Missile Production, Officials Say (September 13, 2023). The key line ....
.... it costs a Western country $5,000 to $6,000 to make a 155-millimeter artillery round, whereas it costs Russia about $600 to produce a comparable 152-millimeter artillery shell.
Since that NYT publication a number of military blogs and main stream news stories have been reporting on the high cost of armaments, including the above post from the Libertarian Institute. No one is saying "war profiting", but this is "war profiting".
One final note. As I said last week. You cannot win a war if the economies and cost of production favors your opponent.
6 comments:
And about 5.00 for the norks to do it
How does it cost 6k for a shell? I would love to see a breakdown on it.
Costs are determined by input costs (oil & others), labor rates, tax rates ad contract terms. Labor rates are somewhat volitional. If the labor rates are irrational, they will eventually end. Energy prices as the prime component of anything is said to be the main driver of inflation. I would also add tax burden.
The contract was probably sole sourced. Congress instead of looking at steroids in baseball could look at these contracts as part of their oversight job. That is if they are not too busy getting flown to Qatar by the QTARI GOVERNEMENT FOR THE WORLD CUP.
To my knowledge there are 3 different accounting systems/methods. Maybe it is two. Prof said either is legal, you just can't mix or match the two to benefit yourself and avoid taxes.
Part 2/2
It is not surprising costs are increasing. Demand is high and supply is still constrained as Western investment in increasing arms production is still in its early stages. But those difficulties will be overcome.
Russia's current advantage in shells fired is mitigated by things like you need 10-50 dumb shells to hit what an Excalibur can hit with one shell. (Plus their dud rare of 30% to 50% of the time while the Western dud rate is more like 2-6%.) It's why Ukraine has recently achieved effective artillery parity overall, and even artillery superiority in some places. And needless to say, Russian production, while more than any individual NATO country, but probably not NATO as a whole, does not produce anywhere close to 10-50 times as many shells as NATO.
Russia has been losing three artillery guns for every one that Ukraine has earlier in the war, and that increased to four guns since Ukraine's offensive in June. That's why despite having a four times shell superiority to Ukraine, Russia has recently lost its artillery advantage.
Western analysts believe Russia will increase production to 2 million shells annually sometime in the next two years. The US and Europe's own production should match that by 2025. So Russia won't have an advantage in either production or cost. Furthermore, the West has far more slack than Russia to expand even further. It's only real problems are 1) it's not expanding fast enough for Ukraine's needs, and 2) how well it can expand production of shells like Excalibur as well as the dumb shells.
What is happening on the battlefield is that both sides are bringing down their existing stockpiles. As that happens, Russia's shell advantage in the artillery duel declines. This is why Russia's shell use is down by 75%. It's why it's going to North Korea to replenish its stocks. Once the stockpiles are exhausted on both sides, Russia will not have any shell advantage. The question is whether there will be a gap period when the West's stockpiles are exhausted but Russia still has theirs and can regain shell superiority, and what would happen at that point.
Despite what WNU Editor wants us to believe, Russia does not have a production advantage. It's long term prospects in the war look dim as long as the West continues to supply Ukraine.
Chris
Of course , why not? It all makes sense now.
The ghost of Kiev , like the great pumpkin, really does exist. And Russian production, even if it is kicking the crap out of the west.....means nothing.
And the ukies never loose any artillery pieces and that story 2 months ago about thier barrels being worn out was just untrue.
Thank you for clarifying that all for us.
And once again,
if the Russians are doing so poorly, why have the Ukies not beaten them or broken thru that defensive complex after 3 months?
Lol keep dreaming Chris
Post a Comment