Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: org.whodat
Are you referring to the 'OSPREY'?

He wasn't alone in supporting military projects that never were deployed but that does not mean that he is necessarily wrong about this.

I am not a Marine. I only know about this project what I have read. The point is if this sea going tank was not a good investment in out defense, why did we spend Billions on it before arriving at that conclusion?

Are our Military brass just as likely to waste the tax payer's money as your everyday politician?

Is there a better solution to the problem of supporting the marines in making an assault or rescue landing type mission?

7 posted on 02/13/2011 4:49:33 AM PST by wmileo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: wmileo

I’ve monitored the EFV program for more than 15 years. As most major defense acquisition programs these days, the vehicle became a nightmare of complexity. Complex engine, challenging high-pressure hydraulics, and a structure that might well be vulnerable to IEDs that emerged after the EFV design was set. Complex problems demand complex solutions, which get more and more expensive over time. The DoD simply told GD “enough.”

But the basic problem remains: How do we kick down the door and continue the fight inland if the Navy won’t come within 25 miles of the beach? So EFV will be re-invented tomorrow. And the existing AMTRAcs will be extended far beyond their intended life.

TC


8 posted on 02/13/2011 5:12:52 AM PST by Pentagon Leatherneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson