Note to Obama: Naval Gun Sales Are Hot!

President Obama’s assertion that the U.S. Navy has enough ships pissed off all but a few of the service’s 429,771 active and reserve members, their camp followers and God knows how many Navy-related tax-payer tit suckers. But fear not! Naval force is still the dish of the day. Even though Somali pirates are pulling back their proverbial [demonic] horns in the face of armed opposition, businessweek.com brings glad tidings of a new(ish) “pirate-hunting ship gun” (as opposed to a pirate ship hunting gun). The updated version of the Bofors 40 Mk4 system is “about 40 percent lighter and cheaper than an earlier model.” What’s more (or the same) “the 40 millimeter gun can be used against helicopters and other airborne targets, as well as ships, and can fire as many as 300 rounds a minute.” Unfortunately, BAE’s GCS Weapons builds the gun in Sweden. Time to give BAE’s millionaires and billionaires incentive to move production stateside, methinks.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

11 Responses to Note to Obama: Naval Gun Sales Are Hot!

  1. avatarMichael B. says:

    What’s wrong with the guns the Navy already has? I wish I had a vast treasure chest of money that wasn’t mine to spend on inane gun upgrades.

    • avatarAnon in CT says:

      I’m sure they are fine, but at some point they and the ships to which they are attached will wear out. I’d think the folks here would appreciate a gun design that has a long and distinguished history (look at WW II film from the Pacific – those are Bofors 40s splashing Japanese planes), is reliable and widely adopted, and where someone else has already eaten the R&D costs. Sounds like a winner to me, and if you order enough you can usually require domestic production.

      Also, these guns are ideal for the sort of light, low-cost combatants that the US needs to be buying (vs the $1bb+ wonder-destroyers / super targets).

      • avatarjwm says:

        The ww2 Bofors 40 mm was the second best AA gun of the war. And all those Bofors guns that were mounted all over American ships and equipping American land forces were made in the US.

        The swedes got a fee, but the jobs and factories were in America.

        And for the curious amongst you: the best AA gun of the war was mounted also on American ships. The 5″/38 caliber gun in a dual purpose mount.

        As for me, unless we plan on become isolationist’s, which didn’t work out so well for us before. we need a world class navy.

        • avatarsmwlce says:

          I dont agree. I think the 88 was the “best” AA gun in the war :D it was also extremely versatile; just as a WWII tanker.

          Im kidding though. The 5/38″ was definitely very versatile and utilitarian for its class of weapons.

      • avatarChris says:

        I’m guessing the lighter cheaper guns are for smaller cheaper litoral vessels that better match the modern needs of the Navy and Coast Guard. There simply aren’t as many traditional warships out in the world now.

        Plus, what is the service life of those big guns anyway? I can only imagine that between the stresses firing in training and exposure to the ocean they have a shorter lifespan than the hull.

  2. avatarAharon says:

    If the gun is built in Sweden then I don’t want to support it with my tax money. Sweden is the future US that Obama wants. I’m just reporting on the lack of freedom in Sweden and I’m not giving any political support or criticism to the following:

    A clergy member was sentenced to prison for giving an anti-homosexual sermon, people have been imprisoned for denying the holocaust, men have been jailed for having sex with but not marrying their girlfriends, it’s ok to be a seller of sex (prostitute) but not a buyer, in Sweden they want men to sit to ppee, hate speech is a jail-able offense in Sweden unless it’s against white Swedish men, etc.

  3. avatarJeff O. says:

    Oh! Lighter and cheaper.

    Well let’s buy a lot of them to replace the heavier and more expensive models that are already paid for.

    Since they’re cheaper, that’ll save money? Right? Right?

  4. avatarJoseph says:

    I suppose we won’t mind having our Navy, or how much money they spent, when we need them to save our ass.

  5. avatarDBeans says:

    Ah thats socialism every republican can get behind

  6. avatarUtah Rob says:

    Bofors has been Swedish, like, forever. I don’t see them “moving stateside” anytime soon.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.