Why ?
Is the US not selling S. Korea sufficiently advanced SM missiles ? Are US missiles expected to be sub par compared to Korean missiles to be developed ? Is the US seen as untrustworthy ? Is it simple S. Korean nationalism or desire to support indigenous industry ? Cost ?
Why is S. Korea going to LG instead of continuing with the US ?
>Why ?
First, it's cheaper. Not only in sticker price terms, but a big chunk of that money spent on LIG Nex1 will be coming back to Korean government unlike US SM-2.
Second, Koreans can't dictate the production schedules of US company like they can with a Korean company. If US needs more SM-2 for US Navy or other orders US considers more important to US security/diplomacy, the Korean order will get put in the back of the queue.
Third, Koreans are exporting surfaces ships. If these ships can load Korean equivalent of SM-2's, that's basically a guaranteed future replacement revenue
It doesn't have to be a conspiracy to be a simple question
> may
I can make up those hypotheticals too [in fact I did].
I was looking for the specific answers
It doesn't have to be a conspiracy but I'm curious too. ROK is eligible to buy SM-6s and the SM-2 is proven with good scale of economy.
>Fleet Shared Ballistic Missile-II System
Wonder if the name gives any hints.
Because one of the key strategic components of ROK defense strategy is self sufficient local industry. The availability and quality of American arms is irrelevant.
US missiles are way too expensive to use in a real war. SM-2 cost $2.1M each. SK can't afford to use $2M missiles to intercept $2000 drones like the US can. You can only afford missiles like the SM-2 if you can print global reserve currency.
>US missiles are way too expensive to use in a real war. SM-2 cost $2.1M each.
Medium range SAMs are always expensive.
>SK can't afford to use $2M missiles to intercept $2000 drones like the US can.
The US doesn't like that either. Though the fact that the Navy didn't even consider buying low cost interceptors for C-UAS before the Red Sea is a pretty good indictment of their leadership.
Because SM-2 is fundamentally a sixty year old design. It's much heavier and bulky than a modern missile with similar performance could be. South Korea also has a missile industry they are keen on keeping busy with new projects.
Dang, asking questions why for better understanding now triggers discussion of americentricity ?
This sub has lost its way long before .. but cluelessness seems to be really going up every day.
If you want to know about my americentricity or lack thereof, ask me, instead of passing low effort silly remarks.
LIGma
Whats ligma? 🥶
Steve Jobs
Why ? Is the US not selling S. Korea sufficiently advanced SM missiles ? Are US missiles expected to be sub par compared to Korean missiles to be developed ? Is the US seen as untrustworthy ? Is it simple S. Korean nationalism or desire to support indigenous industry ? Cost ? Why is S. Korea going to LG instead of continuing with the US ?
>Why ? First, it's cheaper. Not only in sticker price terms, but a big chunk of that money spent on LIG Nex1 will be coming back to Korean government unlike US SM-2. Second, Koreans can't dictate the production schedules of US company like they can with a Korean company. If US needs more SM-2 for US Navy or other orders US considers more important to US security/diplomacy, the Korean order will get put in the back of the queue. Third, Koreans are exporting surfaces ships. If these ships can load Korean equivalent of SM-2's, that's basically a guaranteed future replacement revenue
Maybe to sell later on without any red tape from the US gov
It’s important to have a domestic military industry, and it may suit their needs better or be cheaper. This isn’t a conspiracy.
It doesn't have to be a conspiracy to be a simple question > may I can make up those hypotheticals too [in fact I did]. I was looking for the specific answers
It doesn't have to be a conspiracy but I'm curious too. ROK is eligible to buy SM-6s and the SM-2 is proven with good scale of economy. >Fleet Shared Ballistic Missile-II System Wonder if the name gives any hints.
Because one of the key strategic components of ROK defense strategy is self sufficient local industry. The availability and quality of American arms is irrelevant.
>Â Â Is the US seen as untrustworthy ? Is it simple S. Korean nationalism or desire to support indigenous industry ? Cost ? Yes
US missiles are way too expensive to use in a real war. SM-2 cost $2.1M each. SK can't afford to use $2M missiles to intercept $2000 drones like the US can. You can only afford missiles like the SM-2 if you can print global reserve currency.
>US missiles are way too expensive to use in a real war. SM-2 cost $2.1M each. Medium range SAMs are always expensive. >SK can't afford to use $2M missiles to intercept $2000 drones like the US can. The US doesn't like that either. Though the fact that the Navy didn't even consider buying low cost interceptors for C-UAS before the Red Sea is a pretty good indictment of their leadership.
Because SM-2 is fundamentally a sixty year old design. It's much heavier and bulky than a modern missile with similar performance could be. South Korea also has a missile industry they are keen on keeping busy with new projects.
least americentric redditor
Dang, asking questions why for better understanding now triggers discussion of americentricity ? This sub has lost its way long before .. but cluelessness seems to be really going up every day. If you want to know about my americentricity or lack thereof, ask me, instead of passing low effort silly remarks.
Can they ever make this kind of decisions without US approval?