The high cost is because of the Navy's attempt to leapfrog over several generations of technology. Several of the intended systems have not even been invented yet.
There's the 5" gun with a 120 mile range, the new yet-to-be-developed turbine propulsion system, the highly automated ship systems that is intended to reduce the crew to around 60, I think.
Then there are the stealthy aspects, which are intended to make the (quite large) ship hide from radar, and the new, not yet fully developed on-board radar systems.
I think the Navy just tried to do to much with one ship class. The AF was able to launch the F-22 because they didn't try to put in so much new, unproven technology, unlike the F-35.
"The high cost is because of the Navy's attempt to leapfrog over several generations of technology. Several of the intended systems have not even been invented yet.
There's the 5" gun with a 120 mile range, the new yet-to-be-developed turbine propulsion system, the highly automated ship systems that is intended to reduce the crew to around 60, I think.
Then there are the stealthy aspects, which are intended to make the (quite large) ship hide from radar, and the new, not yet fully developed on-board radar systems.
I think the Navy just tried to do to much with one ship class. The AF was able to launch the F-22 because they didn't try to put in so much new, unproven technology, unlike the F-35."
Good post and I appreciate the information. I think there is another problem here. Because the focus of warfare is momentarily shifting away from the ocean, the Navy is trying to insert itself into the land battle---trying to hard, I think.