Entire class of new nay ships unfit for combat, must run away and can't shoot effectively.

[rightwinger]

if this doesn't speak to why we need Trump....the LCS ships...brand spanking new.......are unfit for combat duty and don't have the armaments necessary to attack the enemy.....on top of that they are costing 2x what they were projected to cost.....

ANd they named one after Gabby Gifford..........Obama can't leave soon enough...

Navy Accepts Delivery of 'Not Combat Survivable' USS Gabrielle Giffords

Unfortunately, for the 16th American warship named for a woman and the rest of the class, the LCS program is becoming a symbol of Pentagon mismanagement, along with the new $13 billion carrier USS Gerald R. Ford that some naval experts recommend scrapping rather than fixing and the troubled F-35 fighter jet.

Unlike many Coast Guard cutters, the LCS is meant to be deployed to trouble spots, like the four warships destined for Singapore in 2018. Another difference is that many cutters are armed with the MK-75 76mm deck guns with a maximum range of more than 20 miles; the deck guns fitted to the LCS have a maximum range of ten miles.

“The Navy’s own requirements show that the only — the only thing the Navy expects, if it’s hit by one of those kinds of threats, is for it to be able to exit the battle area and or provide for an orderly abandon ship,” said J. Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s director of Operational Test and Evaluation in sworn testimony December 1 in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“A hit on one of these ships is going to be a real problem–if you can keep it out of harm’s way? OK,” he said.


Because of the ship’s speed and small size, it could avoid combat and find a place to hide from the hostilities, he said.

Gilmore told the committee, “In Total Ship Survivability trials that we did, the crews did their best, but in almost every incidence, there was major damage to the ship and the combat capability was fully lost, and in some instances the ship would have been lost.”

“These ships will still be faster than any other combatant or warship that we have today,” said Sean J. Stackley, the assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition, who testified with Gilmore and Vice Adm. Thomas S. Rowden, the commander of the Pacific Fleet’s surface warfare assets.

-------------

The littoral program began in 2007 with the plan of 55 hulls at $220 million each. But, today the plan is for 40 hulls at $478 million each, according to the General Accounting Office’s December 8 report “Slowing Planned Frigate Acquisition Would Enable Better-Informed Decisions.” The GAO priced the ships, which the Navy now calls “frigates” using 2010 dollars. Frigates are traditionally heavily armed warships, but smaller than “ships of the line” or destroyers.

Asshole wants to name the ship the USS Jared Lee Loughner after his second amendment loving buddy

 

[Camp]

You are automatically giving credence and validity to a highly spun and distorted Breitbart article and falling for the spin that the ship design and production was a bad thing and someone's "fault". New weapons and weapon systems are routinely updated with advanced technology. If the Breitbart attitude and distorted spin were accepted weapons and weapon systems that take years to develop and produce would come on line and be deployed with obsolete technological upgrades.

So the US can't keep up with the rest of the world? Jesus, you people are unbelievable.

Even a minimum amount of research would educate you. Cost estimates and predictions are made with estimates of advancing technology cost. A weapon of weapons system designed today can predictably go up in cost because of upgrades and increased the cost of the new technology. A cost analysis for computer systems can be using today's cost, but it is certainly predictable that advances will make the cost increase by the time actual production. Would you want to put three of four-year-old computer technology into a new weapons system or would you want to use the very latest and advanced computer technology?

 

[miketx]

The result of too many faggots.

 

[Camp]

One of the reasons the US has the best weapons and weapons systems in the world and has held that the position since the 1930's is that the US has a doctrine of making the best weapons and weapon systems no matter what the cost. It is like the Pentagon asking the MIC to find an efficient and effective way to defeat the newest Russian anti-aircraft system but put a limit on the amount of funds available for such development and eventual production. The development of such a weapon could be on the verge of completion, or discovered, but too high in cost and halted for lack of funds. The "businessman" attitude and priorities are hence, a negative and weakness in regards to developing weapons.

 

[rightwinger]

One of the reasons the US has the best weapons and weapons systems in the world and has held that the position since the 1930's is that the US has a doctrine of making the best weapons and weapon systems no matter what the cost. It is like the Pentagon asking the MIC to find an efficient and effective way to defeat the newest Russian anti-aircraft system but put a limit on the amount of funds available for such development and eventual production. The development of such a weapon could be on the verge of completion, or discovered, but too high in cost and halted for lack of funds. The "businessman" attitude and priorities are hence, a negative and weakness in regards to developing weapons.

Republicans hate our military

They think it is weak

 

[Iceweasel]

You are automatically giving credence and validity to a highly spun and distorted Breitbart article and falling for the spin that the ship design and production was a bad thing and someone's "fault". New weapons and weapon systems are routinely updated with advanced technology. If the Breitbart attitude and distorted spin were accepted weapons and weapon systems that take years to develop and produce would come on line and be deployed with obsolete technological upgrades.

So the US can't keep up with the rest of the world? Jesus, you people are unbelievable.

Even a minimum amount of research would educate you. Cost estimates and predictions are made with estimates of advancing technology cost. A weapon of weapons system designed today can predictably go up in cost because of upgrades and increased the cost of the new technology. A cost analysis for computer systems can be using today's cost, but it is certainly predictable that advances will make the cost increase by the time actual production. Would you want to put three of four-year-old computer technology into a new weapons system or would you want to use the very latest and advanced computer technology?

A little thinking would goo a long way. All you are doing is making excuses for your savior. Somehow we managed before and we will again. After the tax and spend liberal is gone.

 

[Iceweasel]

One of the reasons the US has the best weapons and weapons systems in the world and has held that the position since the 1930's is that the US has a doctrine of making the best weapons and weapon systems no matter what the cost. It is like the Pentagon asking the MIC to find an efficient and effective way to defeat the newest Russian anti-aircraft system but put a limit on the amount of funds available for such development and eventual production. The development of such a weapon could be on the verge of completion, or discovered, but too high in cost and halted for lack of funds. The "businessman" attitude and priorities are hence, a negative and weakness in regards to developing weapons.

How does that explain the topic? Smearing Trump for what you think he might do is what puts it together for you? You are insane. I'd say the guy that gets the best bang for the buck and let's rebuild the military will do far better than a social engineering liberal.

 

[bodecea]

You corporate military industrial complex at its finest, people.

 

[Camp]

You are automatically giving credence and validity to a highly spun and distorted Breitbart article and falling for the spin that the ship design and production was a bad thing and someone's "fault". New weapons and weapon systems are routinely updated with advanced technology. If the Breitbart attitude and distorted spin were accepted weapons and weapon systems that take years to develop and produce would come on line and be deployed with obsolete technological upgrades.

So the US can't keep up with the rest of the world? Jesus, you people are unbelievable.

Even a minimum amount of research would educate you. Cost estimates and predictions are made with estimates of advancing technology cost. A weapon of weapons system designed today can predictably go up in cost because of upgrades and increased the cost of the new technology. A cost analysis for computer systems can be using today's cost, but it is certainly predictable that advances will make the cost increase by the time actual production. Would you want to put three of four-year-old computer technology into a new weapons system or would you want to use the very latest and advanced computer technology?

A little thinking would goo a long way. All you are doing is making excuses for your savior. Somehow we managed before and we will again. After the tax and spend liberal is gone.

This topic has nothing to do with Obama. You guys turn everything into Obama bashing. My post was about the process used in weapons development under any and all Presidents since the 1930's.

 

[2aguy]

if this doesn't speak to why we need Trump....the LCS ships...brand spanking new.......are unfit for combat duty and don't have the armaments necessary to attack the enemy.....on top of that they are costing 2x what they were projected to cost.....

ANd they named one after Gabby Gifford..........Obama can't leave soon enough...

Navy Accepts Delivery of 'Not Combat Survivable' USS Gabrielle Giffords

Unfortunately, for the 16th American warship named for a woman and the rest of the class, the LCS program is becoming a symbol of Pentagon mismanagement, along with the new $13 billion carrier USS Gerald R. Ford that some naval experts recommend scrapping rather than fixing and the troubled F-35 fighter jet.

Unlike many Coast Guard cutters, the LCS is meant to be deployed to trouble spots, like the four warships destined for Singapore in 2018. Another difference is that many cutters are armed with the MK-75 76mm deck guns with a maximum range of more than 20 miles; the deck guns fitted to the LCS have a maximum range of ten miles.

“The Navy’s own requirements show that the only — the only thing the Navy expects, if it’s hit by one of those kinds of threats, is for it to be able to exit the battle area and or provide for an orderly abandon ship,” said J. Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s director of Operational Test and Evaluation in sworn testimony December 1 in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“A hit on one of these ships is going to be a real problem–if you can keep it out of harm’s way? OK,” he said.


Because of the ship’s speed and small size, it could avoid combat and find a place to hide from the hostilities, he said.

Gilmore told the committee, “In Total Ship Survivability trials that we did, the crews did their best, but in almost every incidence, there was major damage to the ship and the combat capability was fully lost, and in some instances the ship would have been lost.”

“These ships will still be faster than any other combatant or warship that we have today,” said Sean J. Stackley, the assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition, who testified with Gilmore and Vice Adm. Thomas S. Rowden, the commander of the Pacific Fleet’s surface warfare assets.

-------------

The littoral program began in 2007 with the plan of 55 hulls at $220 million each. But, today the plan is for 40 hulls at $478 million each, according to the General Accounting Office’s December 8 report “Slowing Planned Frigate Acquisition Would Enable Better-Informed Decisions.” The GAO priced the ships, which the Navy now calls “frigates” using 2010 dollars. Frigates are traditionally heavily armed warships, but smaller than “ships of the line” or destroyers.

Asshole wants to name the ship the USS Jared Lee Loughner after his second amendment loving buddy

And of course you are both a liar and just wrong......the Gifford's shooter was a criminal....and a supporter of Gifford's at the time of the shooting.......the only people who actively support criminals are democrats....I am a conservative.

 

[Divine Wind]

if this doesn't speak to why we need Trump....the LCS ships...brand spanking new.......are unfit for combat duty and don't have the armaments necessary to attack the enemy.....on top of that they are costing 2x what they were projected to cost.....

ANd they named one after Gabby Gifford..........Obama can't leave soon enough...

Navy Accepts Delivery of 'Not Combat Survivable' USS Gabrielle Giffords

Unfortunately, for the 16th American warship named for a woman and the rest of the class, the LCS program is becoming a symbol of Pentagon mismanagement, along with the new $13 billion carrier USS Gerald R. Ford that some naval experts recommend scrapping rather than fixing and the troubled F-35 fighter jet.

Unlike many Coast Guard cutters, the LCS is meant to be deployed to trouble spots, like the four warships destined for Singapore in 2018. Another difference is that many cutters are armed with the MK-75 76mm deck guns with a maximum range of more than 20 miles; the deck guns fitted to the LCS have a maximum range of ten miles.

“The Navy’s own requirements show that the only — the only thing the Navy expects, if it’s hit by one of those kinds of threats, is for it to be able to exit the battle area and or provide for an orderly abandon ship,” said J. Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s director of Operational Test and Evaluation in sworn testimony December 1 in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“A hit on one of these ships is going to be a real problem–if you can keep it out of harm’s way? OK,” he said.


Because of the ship’s speed and small size, it could avoid combat and find a place to hide from the hostilities, he said.

Gilmore told the committee, “In Total Ship Survivability trials that we did, the crews did their best, but in almost every incidence, there was major damage to the ship and the combat capability was fully lost, and in some instances the ship would have been lost.”

“These ships will still be faster than any other combatant or warship that we have today,” said Sean J. Stackley, the assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition, who testified with Gilmore and Vice Adm. Thomas S. Rowden, the commander of the Pacific Fleet’s surface warfare assets.

-------------

The littoral program began in 2007 with the plan of 55 hulls at $220 million each. But, today the plan is for 40 hulls at $478 million each, according to the General Accounting Office’s December 8 report “Slowing Planned Frigate Acquisition Would Enable Better-Informed Decisions.” The GAO priced the ships, which the Navy now calls “frigates” using 2010 dollars. Frigates are traditionally heavily armed warships, but smaller than “ships of the line” or destroyers.

I'm against the naming of Navy ships for politicians, much less living politicians, for reasons such as this: the discussion becomes more political than military.

Secondly, the military procurement process is controlled by Congress and Congress is more interested in being reelected than in preparing our nation to defend itself as efficiently as possible. While I strongly doubt the problems of these programs are insurmountable, there is no doubt they cost more than they should due to the Congressionally-driven procurement process. Our military must go begging to Congress for modernization of our forces. Congressmen, in turn, uses any modernization for their own political benefits.

The process is an excellent example of the old joke "An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications".

 

[2aguy]

You are automatically giving credence and validity to a highly spun and distorted Breitbart article and falling for the spin that the ship design and production was a bad thing and someone's "fault". New weapons and weapon systems are routinely updated with advanced technology. If the Breitbart attitude and distorted spin were accepted weapons and weapon systems that take years to develop and produce would come on line and be deployed with obsolete technological upgrades.

So the US can't keep up with the rest of the world? Jesus, you people are unbelievable.

Even a minimum amount of research would educate you. Cost estimates and predictions are made with estimates of advancing technology cost. A weapon of weapons system designed today can predictably go up in cost because of upgrades and increased the cost of the new technology. A cost analysis for computer systems can be using today's cost, but it is certainly predictable that advances will make the cost increase by the time actual production. Would you want to put three of four-year-old computer technology into a new weapons system or would you want to use the very latest and advanced computer technology?

Wrong...cost estimates add in the corruption needed to get the government contract.....moron.

 

[Manonthestreet]

One of the reasons the US has the best weapons and weapons systems in the world and has held that the position since the 1930's is that the US has a doctrine of making the best weapons and weapon systems no matter what the cost. It is like the Pentagon asking the MIC to find an efficient and effective way to defeat the newest Russian anti-aircraft system but put a limit on the amount of funds available for such development and eventual production. The development of such a weapon could be on the verge of completion, or discovered, but too high in cost and halted for lack of funds. The "businessman" attitude and priorities are hence, a negative and weakness in regards to developing weapons.

Everyone knows LCS IS a POS....Except libs.....Our enemies damn well know......When EVERY ONE of them break down ......Forget the can't fight thing for now.....When every one of them break down, ya might have a lemon

 

[Camp]

You are automatically giving credence and validity to a highly spun and distorted Breitbart article and falling for the spin that the ship design and production was a bad thing and someone's "fault". New weapons and weapon systems are routinely updated with advanced technology. If the Breitbart attitude and distorted spin were accepted weapons and weapon systems that take years to develop and produce would come on line and be deployed with obsolete technological upgrades.

So the US can't keep up with the rest of the world? Jesus, you people are unbelievable.

Even a minimum amount of research would educate you. Cost estimates and predictions are made with estimates of advancing technology cost. A weapon of weapons system designed today can predictably go up in cost because of upgrades and increased the cost of the new technology. A cost analysis for computer systems can be using today's cost, but it is certainly predictable that advances will make the cost increase by the time actual production. Would you want to put three of four-year-old computer technology into a new weapons system or would you want to use the very latest and advanced computer technology?

Wrong...cost estimates add in the corruption needed to get the government contract.....moron.

Gosh, how does one argue with such an academic and scholarly response?

 

[August West]

Sell them to France.

Aren`t they one of the countries that told us not to go searching for wmds? We owe them an apology, not our crappy ships.

 

[2aguy]

You are automatically giving credence and validity to a highly spun and distorted Breitbart article and falling for the spin that the ship design and production was a bad thing and someone's "fault". New weapons and weapon systems are routinely updated with advanced technology. If the Breitbart attitude and distorted spin were accepted weapons and weapon systems that take years to develop and produce would come on line and be deployed with obsolete technological upgrades.

So the US can't keep up with the rest of the world? Jesus, you people are unbelievable.

Even a minimum amount of research would educate you. Cost estimates and predictions are made with estimates of advancing technology cost. A weapon of weapons system designed today can predictably go up in cost because of upgrades and increased the cost of the new technology. A cost analysis for computer systems can be using today's cost, but it is certainly predictable that advances will make the cost increase by the time actual production. Would you want to put three of four-year-old computer technology into a new weapons system or would you want to use the very latest and advanced computer technology?

Wrong...cost estimates add in the corruption needed to get the government contract.....moron.

Gosh, how does one argue with such an academic and scholarly response?

One can't...wisdom is wisdom......left wing b.s. is left wing b.s. and it is immune to wisdom....

 

[2aguy]

Sell them to France.

Aren`t they one of the countries that told us not to go searching for wmds? We owe them an apology, not our crappy ships.

Yes...their government officials were taking bribes from saddam.....they didn't want the gravy train stopped....

 

[Camp]

Sell them to France.

Aren`t they one of the countries that told us not to go searching for wmds? We owe them an apology, not our crappy ships.

Remember when the Bradly replaced the M 113 and all the crap that came out about it. It ended up proving itself in 2003 when it was taking out Russian tanks in Iraq. Also, do you remember when Cheney tried to end the production and use of the A 10 when he was Sec. of Defense? I would suggest giving the LCS ships time to work out the kinks, but overall, ask yourself which ship you would prefer as a coastal defense ship, an old style Coast Guard Cutter or the LCS with anti-aircraft and missile defense systems, stealth and speed abilities and advanced submarine surveillance and defense abilities?

 

[pwjohn]

The ships can run away just fine. They are Democrat ships.

The repub majority in congress continues to fund these boondoggles so that makes them responsible for this on going disaster.

 

[Camp]

You are automatically giving credence and validity to a highly spun and distorted Breitbart article and falling for the spin that the ship design and production was a bad thing and someone's "fault". New weapons and weapon systems are routinely updated with advanced technology. If the Breitbart attitude and distorted spin were accepted weapons and weapon systems that take years to develop and produce would come on line and be deployed with obsolete technological upgrades.

So the US can't keep up with the rest of the world? Jesus, you people are unbelievable.

Even a minimum amount of research would educate you. Cost estimates and predictions are made with estimates of advancing technology cost. A weapon of weapons system designed today can predictably go up in cost because of upgrades and increased the cost of the new technology. A cost analysis for computer systems can be using today's cost, but it is certainly predictable that advances will make the cost increase by the time actual production. Would you want to put three of four-year-old computer technology into a new weapons system or would you want to use the very latest and advanced computer technology?

Wrong...cost estimates add in the corruption needed to get the government contract.....moron.

Gosh, how does one argue with such an academic and scholarly response?

One can't...wisdom is wisdom......left wing b.s. is left wing b.s. and it is immune to wisdom....

At one time there were some right wing posters here who could make some valid and interesting points in academic and scholastic methods. Not so much anymore. You sure were never one of them. Anyone who needs to revert to blaming left wing or right wing as an argument point has no real argument.