Our Navy's Stupid Mistakes

Sure it does for nearshore local waters, but remember they are starting from scratch, have no naval history of note, and those boats have no deep water capability.

Our coastal or littoral defenses would be well notified of any approaching threat like these catamarans and resolve them with air power.

More a concern for South Korea, Japan and Vietnam.

Nothing new here. At 3 times the estimated cost is standard for Defense projects. They submit numbers that congress will support and come back later for more dough. You would think by now congress would gat wise to the system, nope.

Defend? That’s pretty funny but we will let history work that out.

But you said it “makes a lot more sense” so I assume it is directed at the US. Who are we threatened by in our littoral waters? Maybe the answer is relevant in terms of what we do? And since when are we going to start pulling the missile trigger on the high seas, when does that happen in littoral waters?

Congress is the biggest problem here. The Navy is not asking for more LCS’s, quite the contrary. Congress keeps pushing more on them so Senators and Rep’s can direct spending to their districts and show they create jobs for their constituents.

I agree completely that Congress is the problem. They operate without a budget and spend money based on votes in their districts. The Navy has been given an impossible mission of patrolling the oceans worldwide without funding from those that benefit.

is a

Of course the revolving door for retired high ranking military officers and government officials to work for defense contractors perpetuates the system, congress is focused on re-election and spends accordingly. A lot of the projects would never happen if congress vetted all military projects based on need and cost. The previous post #31 USS Gerald Ford is a perfect example, no one has a clue how much the final bill will be, a blank check project.

What are you using as a metric for your statement "ever growing military"? I don't want to sound like I'm defending the Navy here as lord knows they have their share of issues. But I do think blanket statements without facts are not the way to go. The Navy in particular, has not grown, quite the opposite. During the Reagan era the Navy had over 600 active ships, all with large crews and very human dependent systems. Recently, the Navy dropped all the way down to 274 ships. The current, well advertised goal is to get to 355 ships but it is doubtful they will get there. In most cases, ships operate with smaller crews due to automation and such. So I'm not sure how you measure "ever growing"? Yes, the budget continues to go up but that's no different than everything in this world that costs more every year.

Yep, we forget about the support it takes to keep one those behemoth's operating. Guessing it is much more costly than a small city due to logistics.