Where the Navy Screws Up
Almost from the beginning they assure that costs will escalate out of control. Read this proposal for a new sub, from Defense Industry Daily:
The Navy and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) plan to pour $97 million between 2004-2009 into a new joint project known as Tango Bravo, intended to lead to the design of a new attack submarine that would have all the capabilities of the current Virginia Class boats, but at half the size and half the build cost.
These unrealistic specifications are already at the top of the list on many new naval projects, including the DDX destroyers, new supercarriers, as well as the Virginia class attack submarines, all of which were supposed to be cheaper but are far more costly than their predecessors.. Why not build warships that can do one mission very well, instead of a jack of all trades. The ability to sink an enemy ship would be a start.
The Navy and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) plan to pour $97 million between 2004-2009 into a new joint project known as Tango Bravo, intended to lead to the design of a new attack submarine that would have all the capabilities of the current Virginia Class boats, but at half the size and half the build cost.
These unrealistic specifications are already at the top of the list on many new naval projects, including the DDX destroyers, new supercarriers, as well as the Virginia class attack submarines, all of which were supposed to be cheaper but are far more costly than their predecessors.. Why not build warships that can do one mission very well, instead of a jack of all trades. The ability to sink an enemy ship would be a start.
Apparently
Strategypage agrees with me saying-" The new, smaller sub would probably not be much cheaper."
Posts
