Re: DD(X) Costs


"Fred J. McCall" <fmccall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:gen8g2t8bf3g3dqgo74hl6u1ets2r8qrpt@xxxxxxxxxx
"Paul F Austin" <pfaustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

:"Henry J Cobb" <hcobb@xxxxxx> wrote
:> 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.)
:
:So does TACTOM and it's already in production.

Which is presumably compatible with the VLS on DD(X).

The point is that DD(X) includes a new, deeper VLS instead of a Mk41,
raising the cost solely to prove out the design needed by CG(X) for larger,
hopefully boost-phase ABMs.

:So do F-18s with SDBs.

SDB isn't an F/A-18 (not F-18) weapon at this time.

And there are no DD(X)s at this time either. Do you question that SDB will
be qualified on all available platforms? It is after all going to be the
most ubiquitous air-dropped munition going forward.

:Or B2s with SDBs.

Nobody in USAF is currently cleared operational with SDB that I am
aware of. First aircraft out of the gate will be F-15E.

See above. Analysis of alternatives has to look forward to the time

:There are lots of alternatives for operational fires. A T-Hawk
:farm comes a lot cheaper than DD-1000. Can we say <arsenal ship>? How
about
:a barge carried in the wet well of an LSD or LHD or LASH with a diesel
:generator and data links?

Can you say 'easy target'?

So are all the 'phibs its supposed to support. My point is that a
multi-gigabuck destroyer will be built in quantities too small to be useful
and that T-Hawks can be brought to bear using many platforms.


:> > 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?
:
:Be fair. Current doctrine calls for a lot of over the beach traffic. The
:V-22 force give the amphibious commander an operational-reach force but
the
:bulk of an amphibious landing will come ashore in AAVPs and LCACs. There
are
:likely going to be a lot of targets within range of an AGS. If the AGS
comes
:on an affordable platform, it could prove useful. If it comes on a
DD-1000,
:it isn't.
:
:Budget limits are real and playing Budget Whackamole means that every
:DD-1000 costs an SSN overhaul as an example. We're entering an era where
:having a sizeable army is inevitable and the green suiters will get a
much
:bigger part of the pie at the expense of the dark blue suiters. The light
:blue boys will probably retain their budget position.

Don't bet on it. USAF is coming under a LOT of scrutiny, given the
price tag on the F-22 and the rapidly rising cost for JSF. A lot of
their toys aren't seen as relevant in a 'small wars' world.

What _is_ the way to bet is that the Army and Marines will get a much bigger
budget slice.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DD(X) Costs
    ... :> Which is presumably compatible with the VLS on DD. ... SDB is not a joint program. ... It is a USAF program. ... :>:Budget limits are real and playing Budget Whackamole means that every ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • [PATCH 5/7] dm/md dependency tree in sysfs: md to use bd_claim_by_disk
    ... Following symlinks are created if md0 is built from sda and sdb ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • [PATCH 5/6] md to use bd_claim_by_disk
    ... Following symlinks are created if md0 is built from sda and sdb ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Concept fussing~
    ... SDB operates the specified board and is built with in Eboot~. ... eboot.bin provided,we need not to concern the low level drivers any more. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsce.platbuilder)