Weapons No One Can Afford ( DD(X)cancelled // F-35 facing dire straits)

StrategyPage ^ | May 14, 2006

[Hammerhead]

Why build a destroyer that everyone can see when a Fast Attack can do the same mission unseen?

Surface ships have been 'liberalized'. the got what? 1 3" cannon anymore? They've been reduced to nothing more than floating intelligence gatherers.


Fast Attack ping!!!

USS Hammerhead (SSN 663)

[DesScorp]

"...and you get the benefit of losing at least one airframe from the mission profile on every sortie because it is tasked as the buddy tanker."

Actually, the super hornet shares quite a bit with it's predecessor. I agree on the tanker issue, and that's why I think, sooner or later, the Navy will produce yet another evolved-aircraft for support, likeley either based on the E-2/C-2 or the S-3, filling the tanker, awacs, and elint roles. The Navy has looked at S-3 derivatives for these roles several times, and I expect they'll eventually buy one, citing your concerns.

Wiki on the proposed Common Support Aircraft

FAS CSA Profile

[PreciousLiberty]

"No surprise the F-35 may be headed for death too."

Won't happen. Or, if it does, our military will be a lot less lethal than it would have been.

"The Navy got it right with Super Hornet and the aircraft carrier design tweaks....build on what you already have. It's more affordable."

That's all well and good, until you discover that your "affordable" planes are now suffering unacceptable losses in combat. At that point "affordability" is no longer an important metric.

"They'll go from a high of 800 F-15s to 274 F-22s."

You say that like it's a bad thing. I'm sure one reason for fewer F-22s (and more F-35s) is the realization that we need fewer air dominance fighters and more multi-role fighters.

I hope we go ahead with the F-35, any alternative will waste time and even more money.

[EricT.]

Even damage control can be automated.

Please explain how.

[yhwhsman]

The Pentagon Wars is here at Amazon.com for only $6.99.

[strategofr]

"Perhaps it is time to jump ahead to the unmanned aircraft and skip this plane.

I think close air support with no one in the cockpit will be a hard sell to Marine grunts."

Even when the grunts get to hold the joystick?

[Pelham]

That must include the cost of building infrastructure for the locals.

[truemiester]

By haveing 1/3 to 1/4 the crew there are limited open spaces needed. Thus a smaller, more effecient ship.

Fire suppression and closing off of damaged areas to smother a fire, even flooding and area, is much easier with few crew.

Remote sensors and tele-operations can be directed form a central damage control area.

Not just damage control but almost all areas of the ship would be automated. The DD-21 was supposed to be a updated destoryed, unique in that 3/4 of the crew were not needed.

The DD(X) is what happens when a good idea goes before a committee!!

[EricT.]

That all sounds good in theory...