Re: VLS LCS
- From: "Mark Test" <MARKT38@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 18:20:58 GMT
"Andrew C. Toppan" <actoppan@nospam> wrote in message
news:22gf321mp0uddulcfslcasg0oabddg085v@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 01:17:51 GMT, "Mark Test" <MARKT38@xxxxxxxxxxxx>HJC gave me that impression when he said,
wrote:
I'm not against the LCS....but don't make into something it's not...
It's not meant to be, nor designed to be a DD(X).
And nobody has claimed otherwise, so quit whining.
"sounds like a much better option than using a $2 billion DD(X)."
You are correct he never meant to suggest to replace the DD(X)
with LCS's.....
LCS and its single mission capability will become an issue as the
price for these ships surely starts to climb......Just a foolish prediction
of mine....
Mark
.
- References:
- Re: VLS LCS
- From: David E. Powell
- Re: VLS LCS
- From: Mark Test
- Re: VLS LCS
- From: Henry J Cobb
- Re: VLS LCS
- From: Mark Test
- Re: VLS LCS
- From: Andrew C . Toppan
- Re: VLS LCS
- Prev by Date: Re: VLS LCS
- Next by Date: Re: We could use the LCS in the Persian Gulf today.
- Previous by thread: Re: VLS LCS
- Next by thread: Re: Battlefield Detainees Do NOT Have Rights To A Jury Trial In A Civilian Court -- Mr. Justice Scalia
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading