Replies

Actually I think I essentially agree with both of you.

You both are correct...no slam dunk...My concern is our fleets are shrinking in size. Further, the argument that they are more capable is not fully quantifiable as technological advantage is ephemeral and transitory..

That is to say they advantage the newest ship has over 5 older less costly vessels is sleight in terms of combat.
The argument that older ships are more expensive when examined in detail often proves species.

This is broad based problem with technological advantage.

Better I should use an example I am most familiar with.

The US M60A3 Series Medium Tank without the Blazer Armor add on is terribly vulnerable to direct fire engagement, Main gun and even RPG. The hulls except the front Mantle and Glacias are pretty thin.

However dug in in the defense had the Iraq Tankers been US Tankers using the M60s. Our M1 Tanks would have been mauled if not defeated in a Tank on Tank engagement.. Why?

The 105mm rifled Main Gun is extremely accurate in the real world. More than 30 years of ballistic history and knowledge went into the Ballistic Computer and Fire Control Systems. The Thermal Sight on the A3 was actually more costly that the M1 and more effective.... mmmm

Couple those two thing with well trained disciplined and aggressive Tankers who could engage at the same distances as the M1s and you have a recipe for disaster for our best Heavy Battle Tank...

Now fortunately we haven;t faced a mirror image of ourselves yet...

The Chinese would like to address that.. They are intelligent, economically solvent and are about a picky where they steal technological advantage as JAG Officer is about what whore house his mother works in (as long as he can refer his friends and gets his commission on her daily receipts).

I do not want our US Forces to be so concentrated as to make them vulnerable to that "one chink" :) in our technological armor. So few in number we are history before we can develop a counter.

In short we it is not "either or", Technology or numbers it is a balance that is needed.. 20 B1 may be fine if there are 1000 B52 behind them (I don't know the number).. 12 Super Carriers may be fine if there were 50 Jeep Carriers behind them..

The problem is our Generals and Admirals view everything as a zero sum game and if they allow for a Medium Tank like the M60 (which with the Up_Armor Package is better in an insurgency like Iraq). Or Jeep Carriers they conclude there will be less for the M1 or the Super Carrier..

The truth is we need both the most advanced and numbers and no one in the leadership position gets it yet.

I look forward to your response.

W