Re: DD(X) Costs
- From: Henry J Cobb <hcobb@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 08:04:09 -0700
Paul F Austin wrote:
The bottom line is that a NGFS ship isn't worth multi-billion dollar price
tag. There's a need for NGFS but not at that cost. DD-21 started out as a
fairly austere design but since it was the only hull in town, every
subsystem developer used it to "justify" his budget by getting on board.
Unless the USN strips out the systems that drive the recurring costs above a
gigabuck, there aren't going to be more than a couple of DD(X)s built. NGFS
ships compete for budget with too many other systems that can do the support
mission _and_ many other things as well. Things like CVNs and Air Wings.
Things like heavy bombers.
Things like the LAM. Which offers faster response to calls for fire, once the missiles are circling overhead. (And is V-22 portable for infinite range ashore.)
I have to say that the management of DD(X) proves that the USN doesn't love
the NGFS mission. If they did, they would have managed to the mission more
carefully. As it is, DD(X) was used as a mule to carry the development of
all the systems that go in the ships the Navy really loves.
As long as the AGS can't match the 200nm assault range of the V-22, it can't support the Ship-To-Objective Maneuver Plan.
Why bother bombarding shore installations that aren't part of the mission?
-HJC
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: DD(X) Costs
- From: Paul F Austin
- Re: DD(X) Costs
- References:
- DD(X) Costs
- From: Paul F Austin
- Re: DD(X) Costs
- From: Henry J Cobb
- Re: DD(X) Costs
- From: Paul F Austin
- DD(X) Costs
- Prev by Date: Re: Media Owe Karl Rove An Apology: David Broder
- Next by Date: Re: Bubba Goes Ballistic On ABC About Its Damning 9/11 Movie
- Previous by thread: Re: DD(X) Costs
- Next by thread: Re: DD(X) Costs
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|