$17,500. That’s how much we spend on equipment of each US Army soldier. Compared to other figures from other countries, like $1,500 from the People’s Liberation Army of China, $17,500 seems like an outrageous amount. Not to mention the nearly $850,000 we spend on housing, transportation, and other logistics needs for a single active duty soldier per year, it may seem that that our military defence spending is ludicrously wasteful. However, there is good reason for this, and one that may not be so prominent when the budget is first looked at. First of all, let’s break down the equipment that a Soldier in the PLA would be issued with $1,500. Their most expensive piece of gear, a Type-95 Assault rifle would cost around $650, with their ballistic helmet coming in as a distant second at $255. There are key cost cutting measure, poor load bearing equipment, no torso body armor to speak of, and only two radio sets are issued per company rather than per soldier. Then, let’s break down the $17,500 used to equip the average US Infantry soldier. Surprisingly, their most expensive piece of gear is not the rifle, but in fact the optics. Each soldier is equipped with a PVS-14 Generation 3 Night vision monocular, easily costing $3-$5k. This is not counting special forces, who are often equipped with ANVIS-6 or ANVIS-9 Generation 3 Night Vision binoculars, which run for about $9k at minimum. Some soldiers are also equipped with thermal scopes which easily run $5k+. Surprisingly, an M4/M16 costs only $750, very similar to a Type-95, but it’s attachments cost much more. For example, the average army soldier may be equipped with a $500 Aimpoint/Eotech 1x Red dot sight, not to mention a $1,175 PEQ-15, an IR aiming laser used in conjunction with NODs (Night Optical Devices). Also, the marines equip each rifle man with a $1k+ Trijicon ACOG 3.8x sight, which uses radioactive tritium to illuminate it’s reticule. Coming in later is the $1k+ investment in torso body armor in a IOTV (Improved Outer Tactical Vest for the Army) or a MTV (Modular Tactical Vest for the Marines) which include front, back and side rifle defeating ballistic hard plates. It also includes soft armor sewn into the vest for fragmentation protection. Coming in last is the $350-$500 ACH (Advanced Combat Helmet) which can stop pistol and in extreme cases, rifle rounds. However, an important note is that the $1k+ Enhanced Combat Helmet, which is rated to stop rifle rounds officially, is slowing being phased in by the Marine Corps. Other accessories such as multiple backpacks, chest rigs, pistols, and eye protection is covered under the $17,500 umbrella. That was a mouthful, so what does this all mean. First of all, it represents an important ideological difference between the PLA and US Army/USMC. China has the largest standing with 2.3 million soldiers in active duty at a given time, with 800,000 in various militias. Compared to this the entirety of the United States Armed Forces (all branches) clocks in at 1.3 million in active duty and 800,000 in reserves. China spends nearly the same on the rifles of their soldiers as the US does, which means they want their soldiers to hit what they are shooting at. However, this is not the same story when rounds start flying the other way. The incredibly expensive investment in Night operating capabilities give the United States an incredible advantage once the sun falls. A Chinese platoon would have no chance finding an enemy, let alone hitting it, while a US Platoon could accurately find, target, and destroy the Chinese platoon. Communications is a core factor in US infantry doctrine, while Chinese doctrine relies more on discipline. Advanced optics give a US soldier an incredible range advantage, and in a war, the US would sustain much less dead than a Chinese platoon. For example, a US soldier shot in the chest could get up, while a Chinese soldier would stay down. This also correlates into a morale advantage, US troops would most likely be more willing to go into gunfire because they have a higher chance of surviving a hit. Therefore, our large budget for each soldier allows for quality over quantity, and in all, would most likely be more effective.
0 Comments
Ever since the Columbine high shootings, video games that have depicted violence or war have often carried the stigma of creating mass shooters and distorting past wars into little more of a power fantasy. However, I don’t really believe that video games are horrible violence creators and I would like to prove it by using a somewhat controversial game, Battlefield 1. Furthermore, I believe these war games help educate, and in fact pay homage to the wars that they depict. Battlefield 1 was one of the biggest AAA game releases of 2016. It had intense hype (slang for a product release excitement) because it had decided to set itself in World War 1 (which was a welcome change to a genre that was oversaturated with modern warfare games) and the trailers made it look unique and interesting. However, nearly right off the bat, Battlefield 1 attracted controversy. In a video titled “Battlefield 1: 2 AUTHENTIC 4 WOMEN?” by The Know, they believe that Battlefield 1 is sexist because you are not allowed to play as a female character in multiplayer for the reasons outlisted:
Furthermore, I think Battlefield 1 played a positive role in spreading the knowledge about the first world war and it pays homage to those who fought and died in the real war. Now, Battlefield 1 is not a realistic game. It’s a game where a person gets shot in the head and you can stick a syringe into him and they magically come back to life. However, you can truly feel the care and respect the developers put into the story. It starts off with the very first mission, which puts you right into the action with a little historical context. You’re playable character constantly changes, as you play as various British soldiers as their positions are overrun on the western front. Each time you die, a quick blurb on the nature of the war and how old your character was when he died is shown. Furthermore, the campaigns show the full horrors of the war. You don’t play as “good” stereotypical characters nor the enemy is portrayed as anything other than other humans. Furthermore, BF1 helped create more interest in the history during World War 1. For example, “The Great War” a youtube channel dedicated to bringing telling the history of World War 1 through weekly updates, saw a huge spike in views and subscriptions after the BF1 Announcement trailer. Videos like their analysis of the BF1 announcement trailer got millions of views, rather than their standard thousands. Therefore, games like BF1 helps keep the memory of those who served alive, even after 100 years. Previously on this blog, I have touched a little on tech, but I’ve always been somewhat of an audiophile and one of the most important parts of being part of the audiophile community is sharing your thoughts and knowledge. So here it goes, my first headphone review. Sennheiser. A name that is linked to audiophile headphones and equipment. Most notably, their headphone lineup, the HD series, has been considered the gold standard for headphones everywhere. They emphasize a relaxed, warm tone with fantastic soundstage. Their HD598 have been considered the best entry level audiophile open backed headphones, for their price to performance can’t be beat. Therefore, a certain expectation is placed on any headphone releases from Sennheiser, and the Amazon exclusive HD 598 CS is no exception. It was released during a recent update to the Sennheiser HD 5XX lineup, adding the HD 569 and HD 599. Lets see how it stacks up. First of all, a little about myself. I’m a highschooler that first got interested in audio in middle school, when my father showed me his old Ultrasone Proline 650s. I prefer orchestral, lighter rock, and hybrid music. I enjoy artists like David Bowie and twenty-one pilots. I currently own reference closed backs like the Proline 650, and I also own the HD 558, which I prefer for day to day listening. I did do the foam mod on the HD 558, which definitely tightened the bass and expanded the soundstage. I’m plugging these headphones into a Logitech Z600 control center, whose dac is rated at 16 bit/48 khz. Unboxing Experience As the HD 598 CS is a Sennheiser headphone, it gets the Sennheiser packaging treatment. A relatively sturdy cardboard retail box gives information about the model number and some advertising facts, along with a quick technical blurb. Inside the box, you will find the HD 598CS nestled inside some nice foam padding Inside the Box: The HD 598 CS comes with a short 3.5mm to 3.5mm cable that seems to be geared for mobile use, with a talk button. It also comes with a long 3.5mm to quarter inch, but oddly, no quarter inch to 3.5mm adapter. Other than that, there are few other accessories. Build Quality and Comfort. All of Sennheiser’s HD 5XX series headphones share the same basic design, and the HD 598 CS is no exception. The dimensions of the headphones are exactly identical to my HD 558. However, the 598 CS looks and feels like a premium headphone. While the 558s are a great sounding budget pair, their overall fit and feel suffers as while they are solid, they look cheap. I do not have the same complaints. The Earcups are wonderfully oval shaped, and fits my ears perfectly. The adjustment mechanism on the 598 CS smoothly move with a satisfying click, and there are smooth metal accents to complement the look. The 558 is a wonderfully comfortable headphone, no doubt about it, and I have worn it all day. The HD 598 CS is the same story, with memory foam earpads standing in place of the velour ones. These earpads are incredibly comfortable and conform to the shape of your head. However, I felt Sennheiser dropped the ball a little the head pad. While the 558 has a thick velour pad, the 598 CS has an attractive leather covering with little padding. Even though it might have reduced the fashion statement, adding more padding would have increased long term comfort. Coming to the detachable cable, Sennheiser has once again opted for the proprietary locking mechanism, which is easily modded out. Sound Quality: I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not very good with describing sound, but I will endeavour to try my best. While I’m not a big believer in burn-in, I do believe in psychological reconditioning. However, all the same, I let the 598 CS burn in for about 20 hours, while listening to them once in awhile. Coming directly, from the 558 (foam modded), I’ll say the sound signature is nearly exactly the same. Listening to the same soundtracks, I can’t say they sounded radically different, with the exception of the bass and soundstage. The bass of the HD 558 is definitely relaxed, and it doesn’t have much a punch, especially after the foam mod. However, the bass of the HD 598 CS is tighter and packs more of a punch, but it doesn’t overpower the rest of the spectrum at all. Soundstage wise, the 598 CS has a definitely more closed feeling soundstage, but has decent channel separation for a closed back headphone. Also, the 598 CS felt more analytical than the 558, while the 558 blended the instruments together for a harmonious symphony, the 598 CS cleanly separates them to be analyzed on their own. Conclusion: I got my HD 598 CS for $100 on an Amazon sale, and for that price, it's a steal. If you like the HD 558/598’s sound signature and just want a closed back variant of it, this would probably the right choice for you. However, in a studio environment, I honestly would prefer the 558 which I picked up for $61 off Amazon for Used-Like New. |
AuthorThis is a school project for English 1A for high school. Archives
February 2017
Categories |