[Wombat101]

Spent 11 years in the US Navy. Any job the needs to be done typically requires at least four more sailors than actually necessary because of the paperwork and safety concerns, never mind actually doing the job at hand.

Automation is a wondeful thing (I'm an automation programmer) but occasionally, it fails. The systems that run the automation fails, software upgrades don't work as planned, etc. Of course, you still need people to plug the holes and repair combat damage on this "next generation" of ships, don't you? Who feeds those sailors? Who sees to their medical needs? Who makes sure the machinery is maintained? Who manually operates the ship when the systems fail?

You still need people standing on the deck.

[strategofr]

"Spent 11 years in the US Navy."

OK. I just read an article somewhere, you actually know something about it.

All I am saying is, the Navy is projecting unbelievable reductions, percentage-wise in the next generation of sailors needed to man the next generation of ships. Repair may be just as labor-intensive, but it seems to me if you cut down the number of sailors on board---the "tail" gets smaller too.

I believe, in fact, the current generation of ships was designed under the philosophy, "Why have a machine do it when sailors are so cheap?" No?

[PAR35]

Of course, you still need people to plug the holes and repair combat damage on this "next generation" of ships, don't you? Who feeds those sailors? Who sees to their medical needs? Who makes sure the machinery is maintained? Who manually operates the ship when the systems fail? You still need people standing on the deck.

DD(X) about 14,000 tons displacement Crew about 150
USS Ticonderoga (1983) CG47) about 10,000 tons, crew about 387
USS Albany (1944) (CA123) about 14,000 tons, crew about 1900
USS Georgia (1906) (BB15) about 14,000 tons, Crew about 812